Chiefs’ Waters Wins Award
Congratulations to Brian Waters, winner of this year’s Walter Payton Man of the Year award. Waters is a leader on and off the field. A very good player, and by all accounts, and even better person. Waters is the fifth Chief to win the award following linebacker Willie Lanier (1972), quarterback Len Dawson (1973), linebacker Derrick Thomas (1993) and guard Will Shields (2003). That’s more than any other team in the league. Here’s the story in the Star.

Super Bowl
I’m looking forward to today’s game more than any other in recent years. We’ll be watching Peyton Manning quarterback in his second Super Bowl. A win today and Manning enters the discussion as possibly the best quarterback to ever play the game. I’d already put him in the top five. But another win or two in a Super Bowl and he probably jumps to number one in my book.

And then there’s the Saints. What a great feelgood story. New Orleans suffered through so many years of really bad teams. I’m happy for the city. Drew Brees is the second best quarterback in the league right now behind Manning. And probably my favorite player who’s not a Chief. The Saints run an offense where they share the ball and make plays all over the field. New Orleans were number one in the league in total offense with more than 400 yards per game. And the Saints had seven players with at least 35 receptions.

You would expect a shootout between these two teams, but I really expect both defenses to make enough plays to keep this interesting. The offenses will keep this game entertaining. I’ve been on the Colts / Saints bandwagon for weeks. Nice to see that I can finally get one right.

Prediction: Colts 31, Saints 28

Collective Bargaining Agreement
The amount of posturing going on right now between the league and the player’s association is amazing. While this is a storyline that should interest all football fans, it’s really too early to take anything they say to heart. People are already predicting a lockout in 2011. That’s NEXT year! Deals never get done till the last minute. Don’t take anything you hear too seriously.

The owners have been unhappy with the last couple of extensions to the existing agreement, and appear ready to take a harder stance. The economics of the game need to be changed for the league to continue to thrive. Believe it or not, many teams are struggling financially under the current system, and need the players to take a smaller piece of the pie. Right now the players make approximately 60% of the revenues.

From a fan’s point of view, I’d really like to see the NFL implement a system like the NBA where the salaries of draft picks are automatically slotted. There’s no reason a player should ever holdout for more money. Or a team should balk at paying a rookie they drafted. Holdouts hurt the player AND the team.

In negotiations, if you want something, you typically have to give something up. And I’d be fine with teams giving up the franchise tag. Players hate it. Good teams should be able to get their players resigned without the threat of the franchise tag. And players hate it. Or possibly the NFL could look into some type of guaranteed contracts for players chosen in the first few rounds.

People are beginning to think I’m obsessed. “What’s the big deal about these deficits?” they ask. One person mentioned that even though the projected deficit is $1.56 trillion this year, it’s supposed to go down to $1.3 trillion next year. So I guess it’s time to explain why all of this is such a big deal.

Deficits vs Debt
I think this is the primary area where people get confused. People think these two terms mean the same thing. Or accidentally use these words interchangeably. But they are very different. The deficit is the one year snapshot of how much more our government spends than it receives. The converse would be a surplus which doesn’t appear to be a problem in the foreseeable future. The debt is like the ongoing scorecard of our deficits and surpluses.

Example: You make $40,000 this year. You spend $50,000 this year. You have a deficit of $10,000. Doesn’t sound that bad. But do that for ten years straight, and you now have debt of $100,000, plus interest (servicing the debt).

So saying that the deficit next year is going down to $1.3 trillion, still means we’re adding another $1.3 trillion to our debt.

Budgets and Deficits
The president puts together a proposed budget for the federal government, and passes it along to Congress. But it’s really Congress that has the power at this point. The Congress decides how much to spend, and where to spend it. Sometimes they pretty much do what the president has asked. And sometimes they ignore the president’s proposed budget and do what they want. Of course they also typically pass new spending bills throughout the year that were not included in their original budget.

Our government also has to project how much money they will receive through tax revenues — the lifeblood of government. The difference between revenues and expenditures is either a surplus or a deficit. These numbers are still just projections at this point. It’s not until the following year that we know for sure how much was spent, and how much was collected.

Guns and Butter
The old debate in government spending was how much to spend on guns (national defense) and how much to spend on butter (domestic programs). But as our debt grows, so does the amount of money it takes to service the debt. The more money we spend servicing our debt, the less money we have for guns AND butter.

Example: Many of us have gotten over our heads in credit card debt. I’ve done it twice in my life. You think I would have learned the first time. You reach the point where you’re barely able to make the minimum payments, and you realize that all you’re really doing is paying the interest, and not paying down the debt.

The dollars that will soon be required for servicing our national debt are staggering. A significant portion of our tax money is already spent servicing our debt. Not on guns. Not on butter. And not on paying down the debt.

Did You Know?
Did you know that our national debt is more than $12.3 trillion and growing?

Did you know that we have run federal deficits every year since 1969 except for four? See this report from the CBO. The four years of surpluses were from 1998-2001.

Did you know that are government’s “plan” is to grow our debt by another $1.56 trillion this year?

Did you know that in 2009, the Treasury Department spent $383 billion of our money on interest payments on our national debt? Compare that to how much is spent on other items such as NASA ($19 billion), education ($53 billion) and the Department of Transportation ($73 billion).

Large deficits and debts are the enemy to a robust economy. Want to fix the economy? Washington needs to get its own house in order. And economic prosperity has a chance to return.

The Kansas City Chiefs announced yesterday the hiring of three more assistant coaches: Bernie Parmalee (tight ends), Otis Smith (defensive quality control) and Emmitt Thomas (defensive backs).

First Charlie Weis. Then Romeo Crennel. And now the Chiefs add Emmitt Thomas to their coaching staff. Quite an off-season for the Chiefs. Todd Haley has assembled a very impressive and accomplished group of assistant coaches.

As a Chiefs fan, I have long admired Emmitt Thomas — both as a player and as a coach. Here’s what the Chiefs had to say about Thomas:

Emmitt Thomas (Defensive Backs): A veteran of 42 NFL seasons as a player and a coach, Thomas joins the Chiefs coaching staff after an eight-year coaching stint with Atlanta (2002-09), where he most recently served as assistant head coach/secondary. He also served as the Falcons interim head coach for the final three games of the 2007 season. Thomas served as an NFL defensive coordinator for seven seasons, working in that role for Minnesota (2000-01), Green Bay (’99) and Philadelphia (’95-98). He also served as an NFL assistant with Washington (’86-94) and St. Louis (’81-85), earning a pair of Super Bowl rings with the Redskins. He began his coaching career at Central Missouri State (’79-80).

Inducted into the Pro Football Hall of Fame in 2008 and the Chiefs Hall of Fame in ‘86, Thomas played cornerback for 13 seasons with Kansas City (’66-78). He is the Chiefs all-time leader with 58 interceptions and 938 INT return yards. In 181 regular season games, he also accumulated five INT return TDs and seven fumble recoveries. He was named to the Pro Bowl or the AFL All-Star Game on five occasions and was a first-team All-Pro selection in ‘74 when he led the NFL with 12 INTs. He won two AFL titles with the Chiefs and was a member of the club’s Super Bowl I squad, as well as the club’s ‘69 team that claimed a victory in Super Bowl IV. The Angleton, Texas native joined the Chiefs as an undrafted free agent from Bishop College.

Here’s a complete list of the Chiefs coaching staff.

President Obama during his State of the Union address said that the federal deficit was $1.3 trillion the day he “walked in the door”. This number didn’t make sense to me. It seemed too high. I did a little poking around, and here’s the rest of the story:

“In 2008, Bush ran a deficit of $485 billion. By the time the fiscal year started on October 1, 2008, it had gone up by another $100 billion due to increased recession-related spending and depressed revenues. So it was $600 billion. That was the real Bush deficit.

“But when the fiscal crisis hit, Bush had to pass TARP in the final months of his presidency which cost $700 billion. Under the federal budget rules, a loan and a grant are treated the same. So the $700 billion pushed the deficit — officially — up to $1.3 trillion. But not really. The $700 billion was a short term loan. $500 billion of it has already been repaid.

“So what was the real deficit Obama inherited? The $600 billion deficit Bush was running plus the $200 billion of TARP money that probably won’t be repaid (mainly AIG and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac). That totals $800 billion. That was the real deficit Obama inherited.

“Then…he added $300 billion in his stimulus package, bringing the deficit to $1.1 trillion. And falling revenues and other increased welfare spending pushed it up to $1.4 trillion.

“So, effectively, Obama came close to doubling the deficit.”

If anybody has any numbers different than this, I’d like to see them. This quote is from Dick Morris’ website.

And today, the White House unveiled its new budget. According to Yahoo News:

“If Congress goes along with Obama’s election-year plan, the nation would still end the year with unemployment pushing double digits at 9.8 percent and this year’s pool of government red ink deepening to $1.56 trillion — by the administration’s accounting.”

That would basically be a doubling of our federal deficit in just two years. This is not fiscal responsibility. This is out-of-control expansion of our federal government.

As everyone discussed President Obama and the State of the Union speech on Thursday, the Senate voted 60-39 to raise the nation’s debt limit to $14.3 trillion — an increase of almost $2 trillion. The vote went purely along party lines. Obviously they couldn’t wait for newly elected Scott Brown to make his way to Washington. And the democrats knew they had to get it passed quickly. They also knew they had to raise it by at least $1.9 trillion or they’d risk having to vote for ANOTHER increase before the elections this fall. And that just wouldn’t be good politics now would it.

There was amazingly little press coverage. But of course why would the press be interested in such boring things as our nation’s debt when it could be talking about the iPad, Toyota or Lady Gaga.

Our nation’s debt should be one of our biggest concerns right now, and Congress just wants to keep on spending. The President talked about a new jobs bill that would cost billions of dollars. The last one worked so well. The President talked about a spending freeze on a very small percentage of the government’s overall budget, but that wouldn’t start till 2011. The President promised to veto bills filled with pork. He hasn’t. I guess his definition of pork and mine are a bit different.

Here are my thoughts on our debt and debt ceiling posted in mid-December.

As a teenager in the ’80s I was a huge Eddie Money fan. He sang the national anthem at the KU-MU game last night and I missed it. Got a kick out of this story from the Journal-World:

National recording artist Eddie Money sang the national anthem.

Money, who lives in southern California, had the time of his life attending his first KU basketball game.

“I’m in Allen Fieldhouse. This is where Wilt Chamberlain played. I just saw Danny Manning. I had a chance to meet Gale Sayers. I’m in heaven,” exclaimed Money, whose hits include “Take Me Home Tonight,” “Two Tickets to Paradise,” “Shakin’” and “Baby Hold On.”

Money, 60, said in a pregame interview with the Journal-World that he was nervous about singing the anthem.

“I played with the (Rolling) Stones, and I wasn’t nervous like I am now,” he said. “The only song I get nervous about singing is the Star-Spangled Banner. I sang it at a Chiefs game a couple years ago when they played the Raiders. This is the highlight of my life.

“My son goes to junior college. I wish he was here today to see how beautiful the girls are who go to school in the Midwest. I’ve been to UCLA, all over the place. The prettiest girls in the country are right here.”

Money, by the way, performed the national anthem at the Liberty Bowl, which is when he “ran into some friends who are from KU.” They had his agent contact KU about singing the anthem at a game.

So much going on, and so little time to write about it. Healthcare reform appears to be dead. Obama is going after the banks. The tragedy in Haiti. The bickering on the left over the loss in Massachusetts. The gloating from the right over the win in Massachusetts. Conan O’Brien’s $45 million settlement with NBC. But a thought crossed my mind this last week. Can Scott Brown’s win in Massachusetts actually help President Obama get re-elected in 2012? And the answer is yes.

Learning from History
Bill Clinton won the presidency in 1992 after receiving only 43 percent of the popular vote. He entered his first term on shaky ground. He wasn’t well liked by democrats or republicans in Congress. And he certainly didn’t have much public support on his side. Dick Morris has often told the story about how President Clinton had wanted to work with both sides of the aisle in Congress, but was quickly pulled aside by democratic leaders and told no. Democrats controlled Congress, and for the first time in a dozen years controlled the White House. This was their time to push their agenda.

During the first two years of his presidency, Clinton is probably best known for his failures in healthcare reform (socialized medicine) and allowing gays in the military. The American people spoke loudly against these two liberal policy initiatives and voted the democrats out of Congress in 1994. Clinton’s support remained low.

Does any of this sound similar to our current situation? It should.

I have long contended that Clinton was more a creature of politics than a creature of ideals. Despite his other shortcomings, I’ve always believed that Clinton wanted what was best for the country. I think it was more important to him to get good work accomplished, than it was to promote a specific “liberal” or “moderate” or “conservative” agenda. He worked closely with the new republican leadership in Congress on welfare reform and several other policy initiatives. And in convincing fashion won re-election in 1996. This time Clinton received more than 49% of the popular vote. While not a majority, keep in mind that Ross Perot received more than 8% of the popular vote (down from about 19% in ‘92). Clinton beat his republican adversary Bob Dole by nearly 10 points.

In ‘94, Bill Clinton looked like a one-term president. But after moving to the middle and working with Congress in a bipartisan manner, Clinton easily won re-election in ‘96.

President Obama Has a Choice
It is certainly true that President Obama entered office with significantly more public support than Bill Clinton. But like Clinton, Obama has bowed to the powers that be in Congress. A democratically controlled Congress. He’s allowed Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi to dictate the direction of policy initiatives, from the budget and economic stimulus, to healthcare reform. There has been no attempt at “transparency” or “bipartisanship” coming out of Washington as Obama had promised on the campaign trail. The stimulus hasn’t worked. People are out of work. The budget and size of the federal government is spiraling out of control. The deficit is ballooning. People still don’t support socialized medicine. And Americans are angry.

The republicans have already taken a few special elections from the democrats with wins in New Hampshire, Virginia and now Massachusetts. And they will most certainly pickup seats in both the senate and the house later this year. But this brings us back to President Obama. Is he a creature of politics like Bill Clinton? Or a creature of ideals glued to a liberal agenda? The liberals might be able to explain away the losses in New Hampshire and Virginia, but Massachusetts was a significant blow to the democrats. Will Scott Brown’s victory be a wake-up call to the President?

If this week was any indication, it appears that President Obama will continue to blame others for our current situation. I’ve never found the blame game very appealing. But to Obama and his inner circle, the economy is still Bush’s fault. And the failure to pass healthcare reform was because of misinformation spread by rightwing organizations. In Obama’s world, American voters who oppose Obama-care are misguided and misinformed.

The President’s State of the Union speech this week will give us a glimpse into how Obama plans to spend his next few years. He still has time to alter the course of his agenda and win a second term. The clock is ticking.

I’m glad that Joe Posnanski is still contributing to the Star. He remains one of my favorite sports writers. This last week the Royals signed outfielder Rick Ankiel. The signing makes little sense to me. And it appears, has JoPo just as confused.

Here’s just a snippet of Joe’s article:

It is troubling that Dayton Moore’s entirely sensible plan for success — find young players, develop them, bring them to the big leagues — seems to be spinning in the mud. If you are going to be that kind of organization, you actually have to be that kind of organization. I don’t know if Jason Kendall, Scott Podsednik, José Guillen, Rick Ankiel, Yuniesky Betancourt, Kyle Farnsworth, Juan Cruz and so on are blocking any promising younger players from the big leagues.

But I guess that’s the point: If they are blocking younger talents, then the Royals are doing a lousy job of developing players.

And if they are not blocking younger talents, then the Royals are doing a lousy job of developing players.

It’s a good thing I’m not a gambling man. Last weekend my teams went 2-2. But I went against my gut picking teams coached by Norv Turner and Wade Phillips. I won’t do that again.

Jets at Colts: The Jets showed some real grit against the Chargers. Great defense and a great running attack. Brian Schottenheimer has really developed into a fine offensive coordinator. But the Jets probably don’t beat the Chargers if kicker Nate Kaeding doesn’t puke all over the field and miss three field goals. The Colts on the other hand bottled up the Ravens running attack and controlled their game from start to finish. Look for another Colts win, and another trip for Peyton Manning to the Super Bowl. Prediction: Colts 24, Jets 13

Vikings at Saints: A much tougher game to pick as both teams played very well last weekend. The Vikings defensive front four manhandled the Cowboys, and Brett Favre continues to make plays in the passing game. Yet the Saints have looked like the team of destiny most of the year. They put 45 points in the Cardinals, while holding Arizona to only 14 points. It appears that the Saints defense is getting healthy at the right time. And Drew Brees is maybe the best quarterback in the NFL not named Peyton Manning. Brees is uncanny in his accuracy. And he’s certainly the heart and soul of the Saints. I’m not jumping ship now. Prediction: Saints 27, Vikings 24

Dallas Cowboys: I thought it was interesting that the pre-game story on the Cowboys was all about how Dallas had gotten rid of all of the problems in the locker room, and that they were now a “team”. Yet immediately following the game wide receiver Roy Williams was pissed off because of how few passes have gone his way this season. Sounds like team first to me.

Pro Bowl: As a kid I looked forward to watching the Pro Bowl every year. It was a blast to see all the great players on the field at the same time. Only a couple of games were televised every week, and there was little opportunity to see many of the players throughout the season. But the Pro Bowl has lost its luster over the years. And I think primarily because now you get to see NFL coverage of every game in such great detail. This year the NFL is playing the Pro Bowl the week before the Super Bowl, which means the players who have been nominated to the Pro Bowl but our bound for the Super Bowl won’t be playing. The Vikings have nine players slotted to play in the Pro Bowl, which means if they make the Super Bowl, that’s a lot of star power missing from the Pro Bowl. I’m not sure this is a very good idea. We’ll see what it does for the ratings.

Bills Hire Chan Gailey: Where did this come from? I like Chan Gailey as a coordinator, but he’s had little success as a head coach. I don’t see the Bills getting better any time soon.

Broncos Part Ways with Defensive Coordinator Mike Nolan: I don’t understand this move at all. Denver’s defense has been bad for years. Mike Nolan converted the defense to a 3-4 and really made them competitive this year. And after one year, Nolan’s gone. Can only assume that Noland and head coach Josh McDaniels didn’t get along.

Chargers and LaDanian Tomlinson: I’ve enjoyed watching LT run the ball for years. He’s a class act on and off the field. But he’s no longer an every down back. And as explosive as Darren Sproles can be, he can’t carry the load either. Tomlinson has likely played his last game for San Diego. Look for the Chargers to draft a running back early this year.

Raiders: What’s up in Oakland? Are they firing head coach Tom Cable or not? Lots of rumors that Al Davis is testing the waters and talking to some potential coaches. But word has it that Al Davis wants a coach who will commit to working with quarterback JaMarcus Russell. And any coach willing to make that commitment won’t have a chance. Russell appears to be a complete bust.

Chiefs: And just because I love my Chiefs, I have to say one more time how excited I am about our new coordinators, Weis and Crennel.

Whenever I write something political, I feel compelled to explain that I’m a registered independent, and have no love for either political party. I watched Massachusetts’ new senator Scott Brown give his victory speech last night, and couldn’t help but think of Barack Obama’s famous speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention.

Barack Obama
As a quick reminder, Obama served three terms in the Illinois Senate from 1997 to 2004. He was elected to the U.S. Senate in 2004, but it was his impressive speech at the Democratic National Convention that year that catapulted him into the national spotlight. The party knew they finally had found a young, charismatic star, and immediately started to position him for a run at the presidency in 2008. As they say, the rest is history.

Scott Brown
Brown’s rise to prominence has been almost as impressive. Elected to the Massachusetts House of Representatives in 1998, Brown served in this capacity until winning a special election in 2004 to fill a vacated seat in the Massachusetts Senate. Last night Brown won in another special election filling Ted Kennedy’s old seat in the U.S. Senate. If you don’t follow national politics it’s difficult to understand what a big win this was for the republicans. Massachusetts hasn’t elected a republican senator since the ’70s. Democrats outnumber republicans in the state by a margin of about 3-1. Few saw this coming until polls the last few weeks showed Brown making a run at democrat Martha Coakley. Last night, Brown was energetic, charismatic, funny and likable. When was the last time you could say that about a republican candidate?

Democrats Beware
I’ve been surprised for months about the democrats’ reaction to the anger in this country. When Nancy Pelosi called the conservative groundswell “astroturf” instead of grassroots, she angered many. When democrats belittled the tea parties as rightwing propaganda, they angered a lot of independents. When democrats criticized everybody who criticized health care reform, they angered a lot of voters. They really don’t seem to get it. Real people are angry in this country. And not just the rightwing extremists as the democrats would like to believe.

Republicans Beware
If the republicans think of Brown’s win primarily in terms of the national debate over the economy and health care, they will struggle in the 2010 and 2012 elections. Sometimes it’s easy to forget that it’s the candidate that makes the difference. The GOP will certainly gain seats in both the House and the Senate in 2010, but how many will depend on the quality of the candidates, not just the anger of the voters.

Why the Pundits Will Get This Wrong
The national pundits and political activists will be talking for days about Brown’s win against the democrats. The left will be forced to downplay the significance of Brown’s win. It will be interesting to see how they try to spin the loss. They likely will throw Coakley under the bus and talk about what a poor campaign she ran. The right will say that this is a referendum against Obama’s failed economic policies, and against the healthcare legislation currently in Congress. And they’re all partially correct. But many seem to have missed one simple fact. Brown was by far the more likable candidate in Massachusetts. He ran on a fairly populist platform. And independents liked him better.