By ERIC FISHER
Five Phillies played in the All-Star Game. None of them were pitchers.
That tells you all you need to know about the first half of the Phillies’ season. The Phillies are in first place, four games ahead of the Florida Marlins, with whom the Phillies opened an important four-game series Thursday night.
They are in first place because of their offense. The Phillies lead the National League in home runs and runs. It wasn’t an accident – or even hometown favoritism by Phillies and NL all-star manager Charlie Manuel in picking reserves – that their Nos. 2 through 6 hitters were at the All-Star game.
But if the Phillies want to stay in first place and defend their World Series championship, they need better performances from their pitchers, especially their starting pitchers.
The Phillies need more performances like the ones their starters delivered during the 9-1 homestand that preceded the All-Star break. In seven of the 10 games during the homestand, Phillies pitchers allowed two runs or fewer. If pitchers continue to perform at that level, the Phillies will run away with the National League East Division.
Even when the starters don’t pitch well, the Phillies have a decent chance of winning. Their 26 come-from-behind victories lead the NL. During their recent homestand, the Phillies won two of the three games (8-7, 9-6) in which the pitchers allowed more than two runs.
The Phillies, however, don’t want to be dependent on compiling 26 come-from-behind victories during the second half of the season. Those come-from-behind victories take their toll on the bullpen. The homestand before the All-Star Game and the three days off during the break gave the bullpen some much-needed rest. If the Phillies get involved in too many slugfests, the relievers’ arms will wear down again.
The Phillies know their starting pitching needs to be better. That is why they signed 37-year-old Pedro Martinez this week. Martinez went 5-6 with a 5.61 ERA last season for the Mets, but the Phillies think he’s worth a shot.
If Martinez pitchers poorly in his minor-league stint or suffers yet another injury, the Phillies’ interest in Toronto ace Roy Halladay will perk up again. The price for Halladay will be steep, but you don’t get the chance to acquire the top pitcher in baseball very often.
Without Martinez and Halladay, the Phillies’ starting rotation looks like this: Cole Hamels (5-5, 4.87 ERA); Joe Blanton (6-4, 4.44 ERA); Jamie Moyer (8-6, 5.99 ERA entering Thursday’s game); J.A. Happ (6-0, 2.90 ERA); and your choice of inexperienced pitchers brought up from the minor leagues.
Do you want to go through the second half of the season and, hopefully, the playoffs with that pitching staff?
Hamels has been inconsistent. Hopefully, he’ll rebound during the second half of the season. Moyer has occasionally looked his age this season. Blanton has looked good and Happ has been a revelation. But you certainly shouldn’t count on Happ matching his performance thus far as more teams begin to get a book on him.
Remember, this team has set a high standard. Making the playoffs isn’t good enough. These are the defending World Series champions. During the playoffs, the importance of teams’ top two pitchers is magnified. The Phillies would not match up very well right now.
We may learn a lot about the Phillies’ chances of repeating during the rest of July. Due to a few scheduling quirks, including moving the Phillies’ Sept. 21 game at Florida to Thursday and a make-up game against the Padres on July 23, the Phillies open their second half of the season by playing on 18 straight days.
This 18-day stretch doesn’t contain many cupcakes, either. The Washington Nationals are nowhere to be found.
After the current four-game series at Florida, the Phillies return home for three games with the Cubs, the make-up game against San Diego and three games against first-place St. Louis. Then the Phillies hit the road for three games at Arizona and four at San Francisco. Only four games – against the Diamondbacks and Padres – will be against teams below .500.
The performance of the starting pitchers during these 18 games should tell us a lot about the rest of the season. If the starters falter, there won’t be any rest for the weary. If the bullpen is forced into extensive action, the relievers’ arms may be worn out by the end of the season, when they will be needed the most.
It’s not enough to emerge from this 18-game stretch with a winning record. The Phillies must win in convincing fashion. They must win with good pitching.
The recipe for success was spelled out during the Phillies’ most-recent homestand. Limit the opposition to a few runs, win a blowout or two (like the 22-1 destruction of Cincinnati) and rally to win the few games when the starting pitchers don’t get the job done.
The question is whether the Phillies’ rotation – with or without Martinez – has the right ingredients to follow that recipe.
July 17, 2009
PITCHING PUTS PHILS IN A PINCH
OUR VIEW: BIG BULLY
President Obama is trying to push back against Republicans who oppose the stimulus and Democrats who are opposing his government-run health-care plan. Politico.com reports that Obama’s team specifically attacked Arizona Sen. Jon Kyl, who blasted the stimulus, by sending a letter to the Arizona governor, who is a Republican, asking if she wanted to turn away the money for state projects. The governor did not do so. Similarly, the Obama team has begun running advertisements in more conservative states, such as North Dakota and Louisiana, where Democrats are balking at the size of health-care reform.
Neither Republicans nor Democrats should be swayed by Obama’s heavy handedness. Obama’s rationales for the stimulus and the so-called health-care reform are reckless and damaging to the American economy. People who oppose them ultimately will have more credibility than if they give in to Obama’s pressure.
The stimulus clearly has not worked. Obama may tout a few make work government jobs that it has created, but overall, government created jobs and government spending do not heal an ailing economy. This lesson should have been learned in the 1930s. The only real engine for job growth is the private sector, and one of the main engines in the private sector is the small business. If the government wastes time and money trying to create its own jobs, it only takes money away from the private sector. If the private sector, particularly small businesses, has less money to spend, fewer jobs will be created. Instead, the unemployment rate will rise, and Obama will continue to argue that more money needs to spent.
The decision to target Kyl by the Obama team is the wrong approach for Obama to take. Unfortunately, politicians at all levels want money to fund pet projects. Obama is now simply handing them this money without any condition that they spend it responsibly. Instead of openly bribing state politicians and encouraging them to waste money, Obama should be showing fiscal discipline. It is the president’s job to set priorities, and Obama apparently is working very hard to set an example that wasting money is perfectly O.K.
Health-care reform promises to waste money as well, which is why Democrats in more conservative states are hesitant to back it. Giving health-care to all people is a noble goal. But any government run health program is unlikely to achieve such a result, but instead will make health care worse for everyone and raise taxes in the process.
Two key points that Obama continually makes show the folly of entrusting health care to the government. The first point Obama often brings up is that insurance companies ration care. However, if the government were running the health-care system, Obama claims that costs will come down. These goals conflict. The only way to really keep costs down is to ration care at some point. In countries with government run health care, reports of rationing are abundant. The situation is actually worse if government is rationing health care as opposed to private insurance companies because private insurance companies can be compelled to change their minds about a decision more easily than a government bureaucracy. Obama cannot eliminate rationing health care if he wants to reduce costs. But moving rationing from private insurance to the government will make the problem far worse.
Obama also is using a favorite bad guy, the rich, in discussing how he wants to pay for health care. Taxing the rich is his solution. This plan will lead to either of two results. Either the tax will fall on rich people, and they will invest less money in the economy, and jobs will be lost. Or rich people, however they are defined, will find a way out of the tax, and the burden of paying for substandard government health care will fall on middle class people.
Instead of attacking Republicans, and Democrats in more conservative states, Obama should be thanking them for trying to restore some fiscal sanity. If left to his own devices, Obama would bankrupt the country. Any legislators who speak out against Obama’s unrealistic and grandiose plans should be commended.
July 9, 2009
WHY WE LOVE TAYLOR
By MOLLY DAVIS
Taylor Swift may have a new calling.
A therapist.
Young girls are crediting the country darling’s music for pulling them through some rough times.
Inspiring the tween set is nothing to sneeze at.
And jerky Joe Jonas has been left in her dust.
ACHOO!
(Jonas sneezes.)
But none of Swift’s fans will bless him…
Not even a Gesundheit.
The angelic artist’s fans are loyal to a fault — if you mess with Swift, you mess with them.
The 19-year-old Wyomissing native has attracted millions with her honesty, subtle humor, independence, tenacity, and her ability to inspire girls.
The boys like her too.
Different set of reasons, but you get the point.
She is an incredible talent and her appeal is that she appeals to all ages, young and old.
Her fan base extends well past teens — she sold nearly 4 million copies of her latest effort, “Fearless,” and her 2006 self-titled debut album went triple platinum.
She won album of the year at the 2009 Academy of Country Music Awards – the youngest singer in history that can claim the title.
Her music speaks to her fans and lifts them up — they feel they are not alone and can relate to stupid boys being, well — stupid boys.
I have never seen one negative item about her in a gossip mag or on the web, and that really says something in today’s culture.
When Swift’s peers are busy having public feuds or swilling vodka at the latest trendy LA club, Swift is nowhere to be found — she’s a leader, not a follower.
Because while her contemporaries, singers Miley Cyrus and Carrie Underwood, had huge backing to get their careers up and running (Disney and “American Idol”), Swift had nothing.
It may have taken her longer to reach the top, but that makes the reaching her goal all the sweeter.
And although her head may be in the clouds, she remains real and down to earth.
Bless you, Taylor.
JON & KATE REUNITE
By MOLLY DAVIS
Jon and Kate reunited this past weekend.
The result was explosive.
Fireworks, people, fireworks.
It was the Fourth of July, after all.
No real kabooms.
Not that we know about.
But the noise makers could have drowned out Kate’s barking at Jon and the kids.
Doubtful, but maybe there were some BIG booms that rivaled Kate’s annoying shrieks.
The proverbial flames are not being rekindled, but Jon sparked things up at their Wernersville home over the holiday.
According to People.com, the days activities were planned in advance by the couple, who decided to look past their differences for the day.
“Jon pointed to the July 4 holiday and said, ‘What are we going to do about that?’” Kate said. “I absolutely cannot imagine not spending every single holiday with my kids. I don’t care what it takes. I will be there.”
They spent the day playing volleyball, picking blueberries and lighting sparklers, much like they did last year (in happier times) when they celebrated at the beach.
In the pics snapped by paparrazzi, Jon seems to be holding a Roman Candle while Kate and the eight look on.
Jon is the only one smiling.
Maybe because he’s holding the equivalent of dynamite in his hand and men like weapons.
I’m just glad he didn’t blow his digits off in front of the kids.
If they weren’t traumatized already, that certainly would’ve done the trick.
Although it’s only a few pictures, the kids look miserable.
So I have a summer solution.
Sleepaway camp.
Far away in New England in a serene place where no parents are not allowed within 50 miles.
This could do wonders for them — kids love camp — and Jon and Kate could iron out some of their dirty laundry without the children smack in the middle.
Because it’s bound to get even more ugly, as a fortune – both monetary and emotional – is at stake.
This would be a wise investment for their brood’s future.
It will pay in returns — more than any of Kate’s book deals, speaking engagements, photo ops, or clothes lines.
You can’t put a price on the welfare and happiness of your children.
The normalcy they would experience is something Jon and Kate should afford their kids.
They seem to be able to provide everything else.
PICKING THE GREAT ONES
By ERIC FISHER
Roger Federer lost the first set. He trailed in the second-set tiebreaker, 2-6. Then, on tennis’ biggest stage, he reeled off six straight points to avoid dropping the second set.
That’s what champions do.
Federer won another tiebreaker to capture the third set, but dropped the fourth set. Andy Roddick, Federer’s opponent, was at the top of his game, but Federer finally broke Roddick’s serve – for the first time in the entire match – to pull out a 5-7, 7-6 (6), 7-6 (5), 3-6, 16-14 triumph.
That last set is not a misprint. There are no tiebreakers during the final set at Wimbledon. Federer endured a marathon fifth set to regain his Wimbledon crown and win his 15th major championship.
That’s what champions do.
Federer, however, is more than a champion. He’s the greatest male tennis player in history.
The 15th grand slam title broke the tie between Federer and Pete Sampras. Furthermore, Federer has won all four grand slams; Sampras never won the French Open, which is contested on clay. And while Sampras was rarely a title threat at the French, Federer has been thwarted in the French finals by Rafael Nadal, arguably the best clay-court player of all-time.
Some naysayers have pointed out that Nadal wasn’t at Wimbledon to defend his crown. Well, that’s not Federer’s fault. In fact, Nadal’s absence due to injury should make us appreciate Federer even more.
Federer has appeared in 16 of the last 17 grand slam finals. The only blip in that streak came when he lost to eventual champion Novak Djokovic in the Australian Open semifinals in 2008. He has reached at least the semifinals in 21 straight grand slam events, dating back to Wimbledon in 2004. That’s an incredible record.
Some people claim that Rod Laver, whose total of 11 grand slam titles would almost certainly be higher if he hadn’t been unable to compete in grand slam events for five years after turning professional in 1963 (only “amateurs” were allowed to compete until that rule was changed), is the greatest player of all-time.
I didn’t see Laver until the latter part of his career, so I’ll clarify my position. Federer is the greatest tennis player I’ve ever seen.
The Federer-Laver discussion made me think about the best players I’ve ever seen in other sports. How does my list compare to yours?
BASKETBALL: Michael Jordan. I was fortunate enough to live in Chicago during Jordan’s first two NBA seasons, so I saw his career from the beginning. Not only was he a terrific scorer, but Jordan was also an outstanding defender. Six rings. Case closed.
HOCKEY: Wayne Gretzky. He had better vision than anyone I’ve seen in any sport. During the 1981-82 season, he compiled 212 points! The runner-up in the scoring race, New York Islanders right wing Mike Bossy, had 147 points. Add in four Stanley Cups, and Gretzky truly was “The Great One.”
FOOTBALL: It’s so difficult to compare different positions. I’m too young to have seen Jim Brown, who many consider the best of all-time. The best I’ve seen were Joe Montana (quarterback), Walter Payton (running back), Reggie White (defensive end) and Lawrence Taylor (linebacker). If forced to pick one player, I’d choose Montana because of the four Super Bowl rings.
BASEBALL: This choice is made even more difficult by the steroid era. If we take steroids and other performance-enhancing drugs out of the equation, the best player I’ve seen is Barry Bonds. Not only was he a tremendous hitter – even when his head and body were “normal” size – but he was the best defensive left fielder I’ve ever seen. If we eliminate Bonds due to suspicions about performance-enhancing drugs, I’d select Phillies third baseman Mike Schmidt, another power hitter who also excelled in the field.
GOLF: Tiger or Jack? Right now, I’m going to stick with Nicklaus. Not only did he win 18 major tournaments, but he finished second 19 times. He won majors over a 27-year period. Woods won the first of his 14 major championships 12 years ago. If he continues his torrid pace, Woods will soon supplant Nicklaus as the greatest golfer.
WOMEN’S TENNIS: Perhaps nobody has dominated a sport like Steffi Graf, who won at least one grand slam each year from 1987-96, including five years in which she won at least three grand slam events. Martina Navratilova is a close runner-up.
BOXING: Muhammad Ali.
WRESTLING: Penn State head coach Cael Sanderson, who finished his NCAA career with a 159-0 record.
NASCAR: Dale Earnhardt. (Yes, Senior.)
BROADCASTER: Harry Kalas. Kalas, who died earlier this year, was the voice of the Phillies for nearly four decades, but he also excelled in his work for NFL Films, Notre Dame, Campbell’s Soup, etc.
SOCCER: Well, I know it wasn’t me – even though I was the captain of the first soccer team in my high school’s history. Honestly, I haven’t watched enough soccer to have an informed opinion, but I’ll pick Pele.
COACH: Scotty Bowman. He coached the Canadiens, Penguins and Red Wings to Stanley Cup championships. Different players, different eras, same result.
OUR VIEW: SARAH’S BOLD MOVE
Sarah Palin’s decision to resign as governor of Alaska, at the very least, will not hurt her prospects for becoming the Republican Party presidential nominee in 2012.
In the best-case scenario, Palin’s resignation will prove to be a shrewd political maneuver that allows her to raise enough money and build up her profile to where she is a serious presidential contender in 2012. The only downside for Palin will be if she fails to become a serious contender in 2012. Then her future prospects likely will dim.
Resigning as governor of Alaska is a good move if Palin is considering running for president in 2012 because she will be freed up to begin building a national political organization. Running for president takes more advance preparation than ever. A serious candidate must begin raising money and working on a national profile two or perhaps three years in advance. Candidates must be ready to debate at least a year in advance.
Palin would not be ready in any of these respects if she remained governor of Alaska.
She is too far away to make quick trips to campaign for candidates in other states, which is essential to running for president. She would have to fly a long distance to these states, and critics would say she was using taxpayer money to make the trips and that she was ignoring her job as governor. By resigning, Palin has short circuited any such criticism, and she now is free to campaign for other candidates and raise money.
Remaining as governor of Alaska, on the other hand, would have brought little reward for Palin in a possible 2012 presidential bid. Critics who now claim that she is too inexperienced because she is governor of Alaska would be making the same claims whether she finished her term or not. Additionally, with her status as a national figure, governing Alaska likely would become increasingly difficult for Palin.
The only way Palin’s move hurts her is if she tries and does not succeed in running for president in 2012. In that case, she will be out of a job and her political prospects likely would fade.
But it makes the most sense for Palin to try to run for president now while her name is fresh and conservatives like her.
The Republican Party is without a clear leader, and Palin could step right in. To make her move pay off, Palin must spend her time becoming well versed in economics and foreign policy. She needs to be able to discuss these issues as if she has studied them all her life.
When voters are looking for an alternative to President Obama in 2012, Sarah Palin could emerge as a viable option. Now that she has resigned as governor of Alaska, she must build her national contact and fundraising network. She must be well versed in economics and foreign policy to the point where she can offer a conservative alternative to Obama’s big spending.
The path to the Republican nomination could be wide open. If Palin could get the nomination, she will have a good chance, depending on the issues in 2012, of actually winning the presidency.
Her resignation as governor of Alaska is just the first step toward this goal.
July 2, 2009
PRONGER GIVES FLYERS A SHOT TO UNSEAT PENS
By ERIC FISHER
The Pittsburgh Penguins won the Stanley Cup. The Philadelphia Flyers responded.
The Flyers, still feeling the sting of being eliminated by the Penguins’ stirring comeback from a 3-0 deficit in Game 6 of their first-round series, made the biggest splash on the first night of the NHL draft without even making a pick. The Flyers traded their first round pick (No. 21 overall), next year’s first-round pick and last year’s first-round selection – promising defenseman Luca Sbisa – a conditional third-round pick and right wing Joffrey Lupul to Anaheim for veteran defenseman Chris Pronger and forward Ryan Dingle.
The trade served as a reminder that nobody should ever question the Flyers’ commitment to winning.
The Flyers haven’t won the Stanley Cup for 34 years. But it’s not due to a lack of commitment.
In recent years, the Flyers have acquired Peter Forsberg, Derian Hatcher, Mike Knuble, Marty Biron and Danny Briere, just to name a few. Some acquisitions have worked out better than others. But the Flyers never stop trying to get better, which is what every fan wants to see from his or her local teams.
When the Penguins eliminated the Flyers, some fans viewed the first-round exit as evidence that the Flyers weren’t as close to recapturing the elusive Stanley Cup as they had believed after reaching the conference finals – and losing to the Penguins – the previous year. But after the Penguins won the Cup, more fans seemed to shift to the view that the Flyers, who played the eventual champions fairly evenly, are not that far from a Cup.
The Flyers organization certainly took the latter view all along. That is why they were willing to part with such a valuable package of players and draft picks to acquire Pronger.
“I think we’re better today than maybe where we were yesterday,” Flyers general manager Paul Holmgren said the night of the trade. “That’s no disrespect to Joffrey Lupul – I think the world of Joffrey as a person and as a player. And no disrespect to Luca Sbisa. I think he’s a tremendous young player who’s on the rise. But the Flyers are a better team today.”
Sbisa played in nearly half the Flyers’ regular-season games last season after surprisingly making the final roster as an 18-year-old. But Sbisa probably would not have cracked the Flyers’ top six defensemen rotation unless someone suffered an injury.
Lupul, who has been traded for Pronger twice (he was involved in the trade that brought Pronger to Anaheim from Edmonton), scored 25 goals last season. But Lupul’s contract bumps up to $4 million this season, so trading him helps clear room under the salary cap for the $6.25 million Pronger is scheduled to make this season.
So are the Flyers a better team, as Holmgren insists, after the trade? Absolutely.
You can argue about the long-term value of the trade, but the Flyers are definitely better in the short term. They traded a 25-goal scorer and a young defenseman who may not have made the team for Pronger, a former Norris (best defenseman) and Hart (MVP) trophy winner.
The Flyers are not getting the Pronger who won the Norris and Hart trophies. That was nine years ago.
Not to belabor the age issue, but Pronger was the No. 2 overall pick … of the Hartford Whalers. For younger fans asking “the Hartford what?” the Hurricanes were the Whalers before they moved to Carolina. By the way, Holmgren was the Whalers’ general manager and coach during Pronger’s early NHL days; one of Pronger’s Hartford teammates was Flyers coach John Stevens.
Pronger’s best days may be behind him, but, at 34, he’s still pretty darn good. He played in all 82 of Anaheim’s regular-season games last season, compiling 48 points and 88 penalty minutes while averaging 26 minutes, 56 seconds of ice time, second-most in the entire NHL. So Pronger is far from washed up.
Numbers, however, don’t tell the whole story. The 6-foot-6, 220-pound Pronger is an intimidating presence. He checks often and he checks hard. He is a leader with a bona fide mean streak.
Last season the Flyers’ defense consisted of Kimmo Timonen, Ryan Parent, Braydon Coburn, Matt Carle, Randy Jones and Andrew Alberts. Replace Alberts or Jones with Pronger.
Is the Flyers’ defense better with Pronger? That is a rhetorical question, but if you truly aren’t sure, ask Sidney Crosby or Evgeni Malkin how they feel about facing Pronger when they head toward the Flyers net. Ask Alexander Ovechkin the same question.
You don’t want to focus on one opponent while building your team, but, especially in the Eastern Conference, the road to the Stanley Cup runs through Pittsburgh. The Flyers, eliminated by the Penguins the last two years, know this as well as anybody.
So can Pronger bring the Flyers a Stanley Cup, as he did with Anaheim in 2007? Here is a positive omen for Flyers fans: Pronger was born in 1974, in between the Flyers’ first and second Cups.
This doesn’t mean the Flyers will win the Cup, but Pronger certainly improves their chances.
OUR VIEW: PIECE OF GARBAGE
The cap and trade environmental bill recently passed by the House of Representatives must go down to defeat in the Senate. This bill is simply another effort put forth by President Obama to enact a utopian leftist agenda, and in the meantime siphon off money from taxpayers and businesses. The Senate, even though controlled by a 60 to 40 margin by Democrats, should reject this monstrous piece of legislation.
The exact dimensions of this bill are difficult to grasp. Obama said it will help create green jobs. Critics say the bill could cost as much as $2 trillion and will result in rising energy costs to both businesses and consumers. Businesses and consumers are looking at higher energy costs because of the tax that this bill places on traditional sources of energy.
The bill would create higher costs because the government would monitor the carbon emissions given off by businesses, and they only would be allowed to emit a certain amount, or else they would have to pay more for the energy. These costs would be passed along to consumers, who will face higher heating bills and other costs.
The objective of this bill is to stop global pollution, rescue the environment and encourage people to use more eco friendly forms of energy production, such as windmills and solar panels. These goals are fine, but placing massive financial burdens on businesses and consumers is not the way to achieve them.
If windmills and solar panels were great and economical ways to harness energy, they would have been in widespread use long ago. The fact is that they are not practical on a wide scale, and if the private sector is forced to adopt them or pay higher taxes to use oil and coal, the result will be a burdened economy.
Adopting a bill of this magnitude also requires believing that global warming is an overwhelming crisis that must be confronted immediately. But consensus is far from settled on this issue. To stake the country’s entire economic fortunes on something that cannot be proven conclusively could prove disastrous.
Gambling on global warming and a bunch of uneconomical technologies, while effectively taxing the use of energy and hurting our economy, does not make sense. Obama frequently decried companies moving overseas during the presidential campaign. Regulations such as the cap and trade bill only will make this problem worse, however. The harder politicians make it on companies to do business in the United States, the more jobs that are likely to be lost. Although the cap and trade bill is hundreds of pages long, it can be summed up rather easily: higher taxes and fewer jobs.
This environmental bill is the latest in a series of big-spending, big government control initiatives that Obama has backed. These measures threaten to make the economy worse than it is. Even though it is controlled by Democrats, the Senate is the last hope for defeating what is an ill conceived bill.
GOSSELINS ZIP THEIR LIPS
By MOLLY DAVIS
Jon and Kate are now talking about not talking.
After whining about tabloid coverage of their lives to well, um, the tabloids, the couple have made one last united front — there will be no dishing on divorce details.
Nice try.
The proverbial cat is already out of the bag.
Their first joint statement since the divorce was announced read:
“During this very difficult time we will be working to focus solely on the needs of our family. This includes no longer commenting publicly or reacting to media stories and speculation. Our goal is to do the very best for our children.”
The statement continues: “That will be done as privately as possible. We appreciate the understanding, support and well wishes from so many. Thank you.”
What a novel idea!
Doing the best for your kids?
Too little, too late.
This train of thought should have arisen before prostituting them on a basic cable reality show.
And then having affairs with oh, say, a bodyguard or a teacher.
Hindsight is 20/20 and all those other clichés certainly apply.
I’m waiting for the sex tapes to surface.
TLC is airing reruns in addition to Monday’s episode of “Jon & Kate Plus 8″ — an attempt to reconnect viewers with a more innocent time in the lives of this family.
While watching this marathon, an episode from 2007 caught my eye.
In it, the couple are celebrating Jon’s 30th birthday in the Florida keys.
While reflecting on what was once their joint loveseat, Kate makes an ominous prediction.
“Marriages crumble all the time.”
She stated that they had 500 more times stress than other couples.
The change from then and now is obvious.
They are smiling, affectionate, and genuinely seem to adore each other.
A far cry from today, where Kate berates Jon at every turn and basically turns him into a eunuch every episode.
So their show is on hiatus, and on the heels of that decision comes another blow from the publisher of Kate’s new cookbook.
Christian publisher Zonder van is potentially postponing the debut date of the octo-mom’s book, “Love is in the Mix: Making Meals into Memories.”
It was slated to hit shelves in November, but that’s up in the air following all the hoopla surrounding the couple.
This will undoubtedly hit Kate where it hurts her most
– her huge piggy bank.
Kate’s first two books, also published by Zondervan, Multiple Blessings: Surviving to Thriving with Twins and Sextuplets and Eight Little Faces, were bestsellers.
I doubt the religious publisher is seeking the rights to Deanna Hummel’s tell-all.
But someone will.
As for Kate’s book, I can’t imagine who would but it at this point, but who knows.
I don’t want to know what goes on in her kitchen.
She can capitalize on what she DOES have…
Her bod.
Which she strutted outside her home last week in an electric blue bikini.
I said it before, and I’ll say it again.
A calendar.
All Kate, all the time.
Perfect for OCD moms… and the men that love them.
Everybody wins.
