UPDATED: This is an archived story and may be out of date. Peterson has since been traded from the Saints to the Cardinals. 

 

 

Karma rears its lovely head.

 

Adrian Peterson wanted out of the Vikings franchise. His contract with the Vikings would have netted him several million dollars and, probably, a decent amount of playing time. But that wasn’t good enough for him. So he moved on. Peterson was the face of the MN Vikings for almost a decade and I was sad to see him leave, but it really was time for him to go.  A few months ago I wrote about that very thing in an Open Letter to Bridgewater, Bradford and Peterson.

 

Even at the age of 332 (which is like 55 in running back years) Peterson thought he had a few more 1,500 yard seasons in him. He also though, as a free agent he would command nine to twelve million dollars per year.

 

And so he left the Vikings. He left the franchise that stood by him for nine season. He left the fans that adored him. He went elsewhere. 

 

Okay. Well, this is the NFL and players move on. It happens.

 

So AP took a chance as a free Agent and the Vikings took a chance on second round draft pick Dalvin Cook.

 

Peterson's journey went exactly how everyone, except for Adrian Peterson, expected -- no one wanted to hire a 32 year old running back. Especially, not one that has had two reconstructive knee surgeries. And, of course, they most certainly did not want to pay him -- nine to twelve bloody million dollars!

 

The few meetings Peterson had with NFL coaches or owners went nowhere. Calls from interested teams were virtually non existent. The Patriots passed. The Seahawks may have been interested but -- no, never mind, they passed too.  

 

It was kind of embarrassing. Peterson should have retired. But then, suddenly -- the New Orleans Saints offered Peterson a roster spot for about one tenth of his asking price and all NFL fans everywhere went, “Wait --- what? Who? Why? Peterson will never take a job with the Saints. He'd rather retire!”

 

Except -- nope. He would indeed take a job with the Saints.

 

But ... but .... but .... (you say).  

 

I know! The Saints have built their offense on the throwing arm of Drew Brees. The Saints don’t run the ball! If they hire Peterson it will just be to use him as a play action decoy -- so Brees can pass.

 

As a New Orleans player, Peterson must know he’s only going to touch the ball about six or eight times per game, right?

 

Wrong.

 

Peterson has now played four games as a Saints running back and he is firmly set in place as the third string running back. That’s right, “third string.” Behind starter Mark Ingram and second string rookie back, Alvin Kamara. In four weeks as a Saint, Peterson has produced 81 running yards on 27 carries. That’s 3 yards per carry. So, obviously he's frustrated. But to be honest, both Ingram and Kamara are more productive than Peterson. And both Ingram and Kamara can pass protect -- which has always been one of Peterson's universally known weaknesses. 

 

Peterson has politely voiced his concern to the press with his now infamous, “I didn’t sign up for for nine snaps (per game)” interview. 

 

Well, Mr. Peterson, I don’t know what the New Orleans Saints staff told but, yes -- you most certainly did sign with Saints to get nine snaps per game. And you should be lucky to get that.

 

On the flip side of things, over the same four games, the MN Vikings started rookie running back Dalvin Cook. Cook amassed 354 yards on 74 carries for 4.7 yards per carry. Sadly, Dalvin Cook was injured in week four and will sit out the remainder of the season. 

  

I’m almost certain Peterson could be far more productive in future games with the Saints, but he will never get the game time to develop into the threat he was in MN.  Peterson is not an "out the gate" type of running back. Peterson is a slow burn. His uncanny endurance is legendary. He gets stronger as the game goes on. He needs twenty snaps per game in order for his per average carry to increase because he tends to pick up speed, vision and yards in quarters three and four. Peterson needs time. He needs snaps.

 

But they just don’t do things that way in New Orleans. 

 

For now, Peterson is a non productive team member for the team that headhunted him and, at the time in 2009, his teammates -- The New Orleans Saints Bounty Scandal.  

 

 In closing, Mr. Peterson, if the only team that offers you a contract is the very same team, with the very same owner and the very same head coach, that offered players additional bonus money to injure star quarterbacks including, Mr. Peterson -- your QB1 at that time-- perhaps retirement is the better option.

 

But Peterson didn’t retire. He became a New Orleans Saint.

 

A New Orleans Saint with 81 yards on 27 carries.

 

Again -- something about karma and its ugly head.

 

--

 

If you like this you might like GCN's very own sports show, View From the Couch

 

A study out of the University of Michigan finds 1 in 3 middle-aged Americans suffer poor dental health.

The Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation at the University of Michigan, with support from AARP and Michigan Medicine, conducted the University of Michigan National Poll on Healthy Aging poll and found the following:

 

  • 33% of Americans aged 50-64 are embarrassed by the condition of their teeth

  • Close to 40% suffer pain, difficulty eating and missing work due to their teeth

  • 40% do not get regular cleanings or preventative care for their dental health

  • 28% lack dental insurance

  • 51% are concerned they won’t have dental coverage once they turn 65

  • Many of the study participants only went to the dentist once the dental issue was serious

  • 13% are hoping that Medicare or Medicaid will provide their dental coverage, but traditional Medicare doesn’t cover routine dental care and Medicaid dental benefits are rare.

 

The majority of the respondents understand the importance of routine preventative dental care and would seek evaluation earlier if they could.

 

Study author Dr. Preeti Malani, stated, “Even those who were diligent about seeing the dentist and had dental insurance throughout adulthood may find it harder to afford dental care as they get older and coverage options may be more limited.”

 

Other issues that affect one seeking dental care include fear of having a dental procedure and lack of local dental specialists in their city or town.

 

Emphasis needs to be put on ensuring dental care is apart of Medicare or any new healthcare system, and should include children and adults of all ages.

 

Tooth decay and gum disease can be linked to a variety of health issues including cardiovascular risk.

The American Dental Association recommends the following:

 

  • Brushing your teeth with fluoride toothpaste twice a day.

  • Flossing once a day

  • Drinking plenty of water and keeping a healthy diet

  • Replace your toothbrush every 3 months or sooner if frayed or damaged

  • Dental check ups once or twice a year, or more often if needed.

 

 

young-woman-brushing-teeth

 

 

 

The moral, don’t wait till the last minute.  Regular checkups prevent worsening issues, and a dental issue caught early is easier, and less expensive, to treat.

 

For more on this study, see here.

 

--

 

LearnHealthSpanish.com / Medical Spanish made easy.

 

 

Daliah Wachs is a guest contributor to GCN news.  Doctor Wachs is an MD,  FAAFP and a Board Certified Family Physician.    The Dr. Daliah Show , is nationally syndicated M-F from 11:00 am - 2:00 pm and Saturday from Noon-1:00 pm (all central times) at GCN.

 

 

Addressing the United Nations for the first time, Donald Trump’s mouth brought the nuclear threat level to its highest point since the Cold War. Trump threatened to “totally destroy” North Korea if it continues its pursuit of nuclear weaponry capable of attacking American soil and said he wouldn’t hesitate to act alone. He should hesitate, however.

Dictators with Dicks: The Age-old Problem

We’ve known this to be Trump’s stance since the featherweight, dick-measuring contest began between “Tiny Hands” Trump and North Korean dictator “Rocket Man” Kim Jong-un. Trump said Kim was on a suicide mission during his address to the UN, and he’s right. Kim’s life and the life of every North Korean depends on how comfortable Kim is in his own pants, which probably doesn’t leave many North Koreans comfortable.

The whole situation is terrible for North Koreans and has been since their “liberation” from Imperial Japan by the Soviets as a result of World War II. The communist Soviet Union and capitalist U.S. failed to negotiate a future for a united Korea during the Cold War, so Korea remains divided with the two Koreas still technically at war. But there’s no satisfaction for Kim in attacking South Korea -- only a successful attack on American soil will satisfy him.

Given the living conditions of North Koreans, consisting mostly of back-breaking work done despite so few calories consumed, we have a sense of how little Kim values the lives of his people. There is just one thing that concerns a dictator, and that’s the dynastic legacy. Kim has already starved his people to death and likely had his own brother killed, so Kim has played the part of ruthless dictator pretty well as far as Kim standards go. His father would be proud.

But if North Korea wages a devastating attack on the capitalist dogs, the Kim Dynasty and Kim Jong-un will be forever remembered as the rogue nation that got to the Americans. Kim has to decide whether the 160,000 American civilians and 7,000 American military personnel in Guam are worth the lives of roughly 25 million North Koreans. Kim could have attacked Guam yesterday, so it’s unlikely that’s his preferred target. It’s just one Kim can threaten right now.

America’s Options

A preventative attack on Pyongyang won’t necessarily prevent anything at all. If there’s anything we can assume, it’s that Kim has taken extreme measures to protect and preserve his ability to wage war. If America attacks first, Kim will go underground and be even more dangerous.

If the hunt for Osama bin Laden is any indication, Kim Jong-un should be well protected from a nuclear attack on North Korea. If an unorganized, terrorist organization relying on caves and flip phones can protect the most hunted man in the world for a decade, the North Korean military can protect Kim Jong-un for longer, even from a nuclear attack. It will be a bullet or a noose (or old age) that ends Kim Jong-un -- not a bomb.

A covert assassination attempt on Kim could be devastating if it fails. A failed assassination attempt on Kim would surely result in a counterattack by Kim. And if the assassination were successful, the United States would surely install leadership nearly as corrupt as Kim himself. It wouldn’t be the first time nor the last.

The best option for America is to negotiate a deal for the complete disarmament of nuclear weapons globally. This whole idea that having nuclear weapons prevents nuclear attacks is ridiculous and is the entire basis for the Kim Dynasty’s reason for pursuing nuclear weapons.

In the latest collection of interviews entitled Optimism Over Despair: On Capitalism, Empire, and Social Change, Noam Chomsky explains this ridiculousness thusly: “It is quite remarkable to see how little concern top planners show for the prospects of their own destruction...there was no plan, not even a thought, of reaching a treaty agreement that would have banned these weapons, though there is good reason to believe that it might have been feasible. The same attitudes prevail right to the present… (60).”

The only way to assure nuclear attacks won’t occur is to do away with every nuclear weapon in the world, but no country -- especially the United States  -- is considering disarmament at a time like this, even if it should.

This is a moment when Trump and America need a little help from its friends. UN sanctions on North Korean trade won’t be enough to slow the country’s growing weapons collection. Trump even chastised Russia and China for continuing to do business with North Korea. China represents almost 85 percent of all North Korean trade, and 24 percent of Russia’s exports to North Korea are refined petroleum products that fuel the country’s missile and nuclear arms program.

The best thing Trump could do is stop threatening military action and ask China and Russia to stop trading with North Korea. What he’ll have to give up to get those concessions might not be to his liking, but neither is nuclear fallout. So what will it take to convince China and Russia to stop trading with North Korea?

Working with China and Russia

China can’t be guaranteed that they won’t be attacked if they were to cut off just the .18 percent of its imports from and .28 percent of its exports to North Korea. That’s a total of just $5.29 billion in trade for a country that does over a trillion dollars in both imports and exports annually.

China desperately needs American investments in Chinese businesses to increase. Foreign domestic investment in China in 2016 was $170.557 billion -- the lowest it’s been since 2009. Now Trump can’t guarantee more American money will be invested in Chinese businesses if China stops trading with North Korea. Hell, he couldn’t say a bad word about Nazis and saw his entire business advisory councils resign. But he can close a business deal, allegedly, so this is an opportunity for Trump to do what he does best: collect and spend money.

For that $5.29 billion in trade China will have to find elsewhere, Trump should offer a bit of an investment in the country that struggles to attract foreign investors due to its state-controlled economy. There’s enough money in the White House and Congress to do so.

In 2011, the total net worth of the entire U.S. Congress was just under $5 billion, so there’s plenty of money that could be put together as an investment in Chinese businesses in exchange for them crippling North Korean trade. The problem with this option is it makes Kim Jong-un and North Koreans even more desperate and, perhaps, more war-willing.  

Russia holds the key to the end of the North Korean conflict. Losing Russia as a trade partner won’t likely make the lives of North Koreans much worse, but it will slow the military’s “progress” towards a nuclear weapon that can reach American soil.

Russia’s exports to North Korea constitute .025 percent of all of its exports, but as I mentioned earlier, it’s what they export to North Korea that matters. With U.S. sanctions already in place against Russia for many reasons, there’s plenty of negotiating that could be done to get Russia on America’s side against North Korea. Some of those sanctions might even have an adverse effect on the rest of Europe, so there’s much for Vladimir Putin and Trump to discuss besides Russia’s involvement in the 2016 Presidential Election.

--

If you like this, you might like these Genesis Communications Network talk shows: The Costa Report, Drop Your Energy Bill, Free Talk Live, Flow of Wisdom, America’s First News, America Tonight, Bill Martinez Live, Korelin Economics Report, The KrisAnne Hall Show, Radio Night Live, The Real Side, World Crisis Radio, Know Your Rights

A recent study reports bald men are found to be more attractive, confident and dominant.

 

For years I’ve been urging listeners and patients to embrace their receding their hairline and shave their heads rather than struggling to maintain their precious locks.  So many men who’ve donned the clean-shaven look have overshadowed their hairy competitors. Just look at Bruce Willis (image above).

 

Now a study out of the University of Pennsylvania confirms that people find bald men more attractive.

 

Researchers asked male and female college students to rate attractiveness, confidence and dominance after viewing pictures of men with hair and then their hair digitally removed.  Although shaving one’s head made the subject appear 4 years older, they were found to be at an advantage in all categories.

 

Maybe it’s because we grew up seeing Mr. Clean with his bald head and ripping muscles make our mom’s giggle when she cleaned the house.  Maybe its because of the myth that balding could signify high testosterone.

What causes baldness?

 

Hair is made in follicles within the skin and grows for about three years until it sheds and new hair grows.  Hair loss (alopecia) occurs when hair follicles shrink and smaller, thinner hairs grow, lasting shorter and shorter times.

 

Genetics play a huge factor, with the most influential genes coming from mother’s X chromosome, which came from her father.  So maternal and paternal genes can both be responsible for baldness.

 

Sex hormones, androgens, can cause male pattern baldness.  Medications (such as anabolic steroids), illness such as low thyroid and diabetes, and cancer can cause hair loss as well.   A recent study found Prostaglandin D2 protein may block hair growth in those who suffer male pattern baldness. It’s believed 80% of men under 70 will have some receding hairline.

 

Although hair offers many protective elements, especially from the sun, male pattern hair loss is not considered dangerous.  And study authors suggest rather than spending time, money and energy on hair loss treatment, embrace the scalp.  It's sexy….

 

Yul-Brynner

 

Yul Brynner, The King and I



 

--

LearnHealthSpanish.com / Medical Spanish made easy.

 

 

Daliah Wachs is a guest contributor to GCN news.  Doctor Wachs is an MD,  FAAFP and a Board Certified Family Physician.    The Dr. Daliah Show , is nationally syndicated M-F from 11:00 am - 2:00 pm and Saturday from Noon-1:00 pm (all central times) at GCN.

Are We talking about The Same President that Today's Conservatives are Propping up, or Someone else? Things are Not Lining Up!

“Prevention is better than cure!”

You would think that the way today's conservatives (yesterday's liberals) are propping up Donald Trump and what he is really doing that they are talking of someone else. Yet, they are not! This is why it is so important to pay attention to what our representatives do rather than what they say (Matthew 7:16).  The man and the office are the same.

The political photo ops are taking place across the country with the new president helping with disaster relief, going into black communities and hugging and kissing folks, prayers at the administration’s table before session.  All of these are available online.  They’re everything good Americans want, and rightly so.

However, is this diversion to keep your eyes off of the ball and putting Americans back to sleep? (Matthew 24:5; Ephesians 5:14)

Of course, it is!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZdhRrb_xObQ

The New American reported:

The Trump administration is asking Congress to renew a law giving intelligence agencies the authority to collect the communications of millions of Americans without a warrant — despite the fact that such surveillance led to charges that President Donald Trump is in cahoots with Russia.

The law in question is Title VII of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), Section 702, which authorizes the National Security Agency (NSA) to intercept the communications of foreigners located outside the United States without obtaining a search warrant. The law expires at the end of the year unless Congress passes legislation reauthorizing it.

“Reauthorizing this critical authority is the top legislative priority of the Department of Justice and the Intelligence Community,” Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats wrote in a September 7 letter to congressional leaders.

Sessions and Coats argued that the law’s privacy protections are sufficient to comply with the Fourth Amendment, which requires authorities to obtain a warrant based on probable cause before they conduct a search. However, as Nate Cardozo, senior staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, told Reason, the government is “using [the law] to spy on Americans.”

This should hardly come as a surprise. As Agence France-Presse reminds us, “Section 702 was passed in 2008 to replace a previously secret and illegal warrantless wiretap program instituted after the September 11, 2001 attacks.” In other words, Congress retroactively codified a blatantly unconstitutional policy that was known to vacuum up data on innocent Americans.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L55-70SKwGY

Pamella Geller posted this week that Trump was adhering to Sharia by not critizing Islam in his 9/11 speech.

This morning on “Breitbart News Daily,” Geller and guest host Raheem Kassam shared their disappointment with the lack of criticism of Islam in Trump’s speech at yesterday’s memorial service and lamented the idea that “globalist” forces inside the White House have shifted Trump away from his extreme anti-Islam rhetoric.

“We are now sure that it’s a pattern,” Kassam said. “So the positive will be that we can now move on this issue.”

“What the president is doing, and his administration is doing, is adhering to the Sharia; you cannot criticize Islam,” Geller said. She then declared that anti-Islam activists like her “have to make our voices known.”

“We have to, whether it is via Breitbart or comments or phone calls—yes, we have to tell the president that this is unacceptable,” Geller said….

On August 30, 2017, a headline reported Sebastian Gorka and Another Broken Trump Promise:

The specific problem was Trump’s apparent retreat from his repeated insistence on speaking about “radical Islamic terrorism” rather than a faceless, amorphous and ideology-free terrorist threat. Gorka continued:

 

Regrettably, outside of yourself, the individuals who most embodied and represented the policies that will “Make America Great Again,” have been internally countered, systematically removed, or undermined in recent months.

This was made patently obvious as I read the text of your speech on Afghanistan this week.

The fact that those who drafted and approved the speech removed any mention of Radical Islam or radical Islamic terrorism proves that a crucial element of your presidential campaign has been lost.

Furthermore, we already know that The Department of Homeland is stacked with Muslim Brotherhood ties and have re-defined what a terrorist is.

Original Definition Oxford English Dictionary “Government by intimidation.”

Here’s how they are defining terrorists:

1. Those that talk about “individual liberties”

2. Those that advocate for states’ rights

3. Those that want “to make the world a better place”

4. “The colonists who sought to free themselves from British rule”

5. Those that are interested in “defeating the Communists”

6. Those that believe “that the interests of one’s own nation are separate from the interests of other nations or the common interest of all nations”

7. Anyone that holds a “political ideology that considers the state to be unnecessary, harmful, or undesirable”

8. Anyone that possesses an “intolerance toward other religions”

9. Those that “take action to fight against the exploitation of the environment and/or animals”

10. “Anti-Homosexual”

11. “Anti-Immigrant”

12. “Anti-Muslim”

13. “The Patriot Movement”

14. “Opposition to equal rights for homosexuals and lesbians”

15. Members of the Family Research Council

16. Members of the American Family Association

17. Those that believe that Mexico, Canada and the United States “are secretly planning to merge into a European Union-like entity that will be known as the ‘North American Union'”

18. Members of the American Border Patrol/American Patrol

19. Members of the Federation for American Immigration Reform

20. Members of the Tennessee Freedom Coalition

21. Members of the Christian Action Network

22. Anyone that is “opposed to the New World Order”

23. Anyone that is engaged in “conspiracy theorizing”

24. Anyone that is opposed to Agenda 21

25. Anyone that is concerned about FEMA camps

26. Anyone that “fears impending gun control or weapons confiscations”

27. The militia movement

28. The sovereign citizen movement

29. Those that “don’t think they should have to pay taxes”

30. Anyone that “complains about bias”

31. Anyone that “believes in government conspiracies to the point of paranoia”

32. Anyone that “is frustrated with mainstream ideologies”

33. Anyone that “visits extremist websites/blogs”

34. Anyone that “establishes website/blog to display extremist views”

35. Anyone that “attends rallies for extremist causes”

36. Anyone that “exhibits extreme religious intolerance”

37. Anyone that “is personally connected with a grievance”

38. Anyone that “suddenly acquires weapons”

39. Anyone that “organizes protests inspired by extremist ideology”

40. “Militia or unorganized militia”

41. “General right-wing extremist”

42. Citizens that have “bumper stickers” that are patriotic or anti-U.N.

43. Those that refer to an “Army of God”

44. Those that are “fiercely nationalistic (as opposed to universal and international in orientation)”

45. Those that are “anti-global”

46. Those that are “suspicious of centralized federal authority”

47. Those that are “reverent of individual liberty”

48. Those that “believe in conspiracy theories”

49. Those that have “a belief that one’s personal and/or national ‘way of life’ is under attack”

50. Those that possess “a belief in the need to be prepared for an attack either by participating in paramilitary preparations and training or survivalism”

51. Those that would “impose strict religious tenets or laws on society (fundamentalists)”

52. Those that would “insert religion into the political sphere”

53. Anyone that would “seek to politicize religion”

54. Those that have “supported political movements for autonomy”

55. Anyone that is “anti-abortion”

56. Anyone that is “anti-Catholic”

57. Anyone that is “anti-nuclear”

58. “Rightwing extremists”

59. “Returning veterans”

60. Those concerned about “illegal immigration”

61. Those that “believe in the right to bear arms”

62. Anyone that is engaged in “ammunition stockpiling”

63. Anyone that exhibits “fear of Communist regimes”

64. “Anti-abortion activists”

65. Those that are against illegal immigration

66. Those that talk about “the New World Order” in a “derogatory” manner

67. Those that have a negative view of the United Nations

68. Those that are opposed “to the collection of federal income taxes”

69. Those that supported former presidential candidates Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin and Bob Barr

70. Those that display the Gadsden Flag (“Don’t Tread On Me”)

71. Those that believe in “end times” prophecies

72. Evangelical Christians

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IuqQRB6pIvU

While the new administration is pushing forth that which the preceding administration was pushing forth, and the one that preceded that administration, rest assured, the agenda is going forward.

The sooner that the American people understand that Donald Trump is nothing more than another pawn in the never ending game of politics, the sooner things can change for the better (Jeremiah 5:20-31).

Regardless of who you think your representatives are and are not, under the pretenses that they put up (2 Corinthians 11:14), it matters not.  This is between you and the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, period. Repent! (Leviticus 26:14-46: Acts 20:21).

This is mercy! And it is a message that we all will be forced to receive either through accepting the message or rejecting it. 

--

Bradlee Dean is a guest contributor to GCN news. His views and opinions, if expressed, do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of the Genesis Communication Network. Bradlee's radio program, The Sons of Liberty broadcasts live M - Sat only here at GCN. 

GCN is happy to announce that HEIDI SELEXA will join our broadcast family beginning Monday, September 18th. Her new program -- The Heidi Selexa Show! -- will air from 3:00pm to 5:00pm CST, Monday through Friday.

 

The Heidi Selexa Show is our long-awaited talk show about the world according to Heidi -- as only Heidi sees it!  Heidi’s playful, upbeat take on current events, pop culture and relationships is authentic, refreshing and blended together with a lot of fun. Don’t let her giggle fool you, though, her show cuts deep and inspires you to think.

 

Heidi’s personality is infectious -- imagine one part Gracie Allen, one part Stockard Channing, a dash of Lucille Ball, two splashes of Goldie Hawn, a zany red burst of Amy Poehler, and a little twist of Jessica Rabbit on Dexatrim (with a side glass of Merlot).  

 

That’s Heidi.

 

That’s -- The Heidi Selexa Show! 

 

--

 

“There is nothing a little Dexatrim and Merlot can’t fix…. it’s The Heidi Selexa Show!”

  

 

 

With the Minnesota Twins collecting just their fourth walkoff win of the season at Target Field, Wednesday night, they are two games ahead of the Los Angeles Angels for the second Wild Card spot in the American League. They could now become the first team ever to make the playoffs having lost more than 100 games the previous year.

The Twins have a 60 percent chance to make the playoffs given that seven of their last 17 games are against the hapless Detroit Tigers. I wrote about how these Twins could be the biggest underdog overachievers of all time, but now the team doesn’t look like overachievers. What once was a -68 run differential is now +8. Everything’s coming together like it did for the Twins in 1987 and 1991.

The Twins traded their All-Star closer and got better! The Twins lost All-Star slugger and third baseman Miguel Sano to injury and got better! The Twins lost the designated hitter with the highest on-base percentage in baseball, Robbie Grossman, and got better! So not only does Paul Molitor deserve an extension with the Twins, he should probably win the AL Manager of the Year award.

I was not a supporter of Paul Molitor’s when Ron Gardenhire was let go by the Minnesota Twins. In fact, I had Ozzie Guillen and Rusty Kuntz ahead of him on my dream list of managers.

I didn’t like Molitor’s first lineup, and there are few I’ve agreed with since, because batting your best home run hitter in the leadoff spot has never made much sense to me, especially with two players with on-base percentages in the top-10 in baseball (Joe Mauer and Robbie Grossman). Dozier gets himself out on the first pitch a lot, and that’s not helpful to his teammates when leading off a game.

I do appreciate Molitor’s willingness to move everyone else around the lineup, though. The rigidity I expected has never been the case, and Molitor has even platooned players effectively, namely Max Kepler. He’s also managed to get Grossman plenty of at-bats without using him in the outfield.

Most impressive is what Molitor’s done with a baby-faced bullpen and over-the-hill starting rotation. When he badly needed someone to step into the rotation and eat some innings, Derek Falvey and Thad Levine gave him 44-year-old Bartolo Colon. That was enough to satisfy me, and it has been enough to satisfy Molitor so far.

Right now, I think these Twins are better than the New York Yankees in a five-game series. They’ve been better in a three-game series thus far this season, and will have a chance to close the three-game gap between them and the Yankees starting Monday in New York. Here’s how the potential playoff preview lines up:

Game 2: Monday, Sept. 18 at 6:05 p.m. CST

A battle of the aces -- Ervin Santana versus Sonny Gray. This should be a good one. Santana tossed six innings of shutout ball to give Eddie Rosario the chance to win it with a walkoff homer deep into the Minneapolis night.

Sonny Gray has been great for the Yankees, but the Yankees haven’t been great for him. In five of his eight starts, the Yankees have managed just one run or less of support despite Gray’s sterling 2.66 ERA since the trade from Oakland.

Game 2: Tuesday, Sept. 19 at 6:05 p.m. CST

Jose Berrios takes on Twin-for-a-game Jaime Garcia. Garcia has struggled mightily since the trade from Minnesota. In fact, he hasn’t pitched six innings since his first and last start in a Twins uniform.

Berrios, on the other hand, is coming off his best start of his career. He might have not gotten a win in Kansas City, but he pitched his best in yet another high-pressure situation early in the game. With the bases loaded and one out in the second inning, Berrios got a double-play grounder off the hot bat of Whit Merrifield. He went on to complete seven innings, allowing just two runs.

Game 3: Wednesday, Sept. 20 at 1 p.m. CST (ESPN)

Two players who’ve seen their seasons turnaround in the second half -- Bartolo Colon and Masahiro Tanaka -- close out the season series. Both pitchers are coming off ugly starts, though.

Tanaka allowed seven earned runs over four innings against a tough Texas lineup, but he had won four consecutive starts prior visiting Arlington.

Colon was even worse in Kansas City, failing to complete two innings and allowing six earned runs. He too had been great in his four previous starts, though.

If the Twins are to overcome the history of failures against the Yankees in the playoffs (1-9 in their last 10 postseason games), playing at Target Field might help, despite a better record on the road this season (39-32). The Yankees will enter the postseason on a seven-game homestand ending Oct. 1.

The Twins finish the regular season with a three-game series against Detroit ending Oct. 1. The American League Wild Card Game is scheduled for Tuesday, Oct. 3 with a time to be determined.

--

If you like this, you might like these Genesis Communications Network talk shows: View From The Couch

JJ Abrams taking over writing and directing duties on Episode IX from ousted helmsman Colin Trevorrow is not exactly surprising. Citing, “creative differences” Lucasfilm sent Trevorrow packing, which makes him the fourth time Disney has hired a director -- had said director work on their Star Wars project (for years!) and then fired said director. That’s six feature films, four fired directors and two fired screenwriters.

 

To be honest, the removal of a screenwriter is nothing new; however, the removal of a director is rare and the removal of a director after shooting some, if not most of the production -- is unheard of.

Unless, apparently, you work at Disney Lucasfilm. Where it happens all the time. 

 

So what’s going on over at Disney Lucasfilm? 

 

The simple answer: They keep hiring indie directors who are used to having enormous creative control. Those directors don’t do well when under the microscope of a colossal tent pole franchise construction where everyone wants a piece of the pie.

 

That being said -- four director replacements in six movies? Are we talking gross management incompetence or are all these changes justified? Or is it both?

 

Let’s take a look at the hit list:

 

Screenwriter -- Academy Award Winner Michael Arndt. Movie: Star Wars: The Force Awakens.

 

Screenwriter Michael Arndt, (Little Miss Sunshine, Toy Story 3), was brought on to Star Wars way back in 2012, and he toiled on the screenplay for almost a year and a half -- and never produced a single complete draft.

 

By the end of 2013,  JJ Abrams had had enough, stepped in as writer but also hired screenwriter and Star Wars vet -- Lawrence Kasdan (writer: The Empire Strikes Back, Return of the Jedi, Raiders of the Lost Ark). Arndt was out and Abrams and Kasdan hacked out a first draft by January 2014. 

 

It should be noted that Abrams has gone on record to say that while it’s true Arndt never finished a completed draft but Arndt did turn in plenty of notes, treatments & outlines and offered plenty of ideas and input that made it into the final Abrams / Kasdan screenplay.

 

Arndt discusses with Entertainment Weekly, some of his story problems and the ideas that did not make it into the final draft:  

 

“Early on I tried to write versions of the story where [Rey] is at home, her home is destroyed, and then she goes on the road and meets Luke. And then she goes and kicks the bad guy’s ass, It just never worked and I struggled with this. This was back in 2012. It just felt like every time Luke came in and entered the movie, he just took it over. Suddenly you didn’t care about your main character [Rey] anymore because, ‘Oh fuck, Luke Skywalker’s here. I want to see what he’s going to do.’”

 

Fair enough. But still. If you work on a screenplay for a year and a half and don’t turn in a single complete draft -- you get fired.

 

I call this firing: Completely reasonable.

 

Director -- Josh Trank. Movie: Untitled Boba Fett feature film.

 

During the 2015 Star Wars Celebration in Anaheim, CA, Lucasfilm set up a panel for directors Gareth Edwards of Rogue One, Monster and Godzilla (2014) and Josh Trank of Untitled Boba Fett feature film, Chronicle and Fantastic Four (2015) to discuss their upcoming Star Wars projects. Mysteriously, Trank no showed. Edwards pushed forward alone. Soon there after we found out that Trank pulled out of the event a two days before when he realized he was getting removed from the Boba Fett film. And, sure enough, a week after the Anaheim celebration, Trank was fired from the Boba Fett feature film.

 

Trank’s statement at the time:

 

“After a year of having the incredible honor of developing with the wonderful and talented people at Lucasfilm, I’m making a personal decision to move forward on a different path. I’ve put a tremendous amount of thought into this, and I know deep down in my heart that I want to pursue some original creative opportunities. That said, the Star Wars universe has always been one of my biggest influences, and I couldn’t be more excited to witness its future alongside my millions of fellow Star Wars fans. I want to thank my friends Kathleen Kennedy, Kiri Hart, Simon Kinberg, and everyone at Lucasfilm and Disney for the amazing opportunity to have been a part of this. May the Force be with you all.”

 

Very polite. But the firing was not surprising. Do a quick Google search on Trank and Fantastic Four and you will find a slew of articles that detail Trank’s erratic behavior on the set of the much maligned F.F. film. It really was no shock to hear he had been fired. In fact, his juvenile antics, his chronic tardiness and absenteeism and, according to many cast and crew members, his unprofessional behavior on the set of the Fant4stic has all but effectively ruined his film career. Trank has had no major studio work since the F.F. and nothing mapped out for him on future charts.

 

With the horrible stories coming off the F.F. set, it’s not surprising that Disney had cold feet about the young director. The Boba Fett film died with Trank’s departure.

 

Okay, so -- several months of crazy, bad behavior by immature director and no one wants to work with him ever again? 

 

I call this firing: Completely reasonable.

 

Directors -- Christopher Miller and Phil Lord. Movie: Untitled Han Solo feature film.

 

The co-directors behind the new Han Solo film were replaced after shooting, reportedly, almost eighty percent of the film. This is totally unheard of.

 

According to the Hollywood Reporter:

 

“Several sources close to the movie and others close to the directors tell EW that ever since filming began back in February, Lord and Miller, who are known primarily for wry, self-referential comedies like 21 Jump Street and the pilot episodes for Brooklyn Nine-Nine and Last Man on Earth, began steering the Han Solo movie more into the genre of laughs than space fantasy.

 

According to some sources, the split was a subtle one that became magnified over time: Lucasfilm and producer Kennedy believed Lord and Miller were hired to add a comedic touch; Lord and Miller believed they were hired to make a comedy.”

 

For a more detailed view,  I wrote about it a few months ago.  But, basically, the directors ignored the required tone of the film and began to make a screwball comedy. Some of the actors complained to execs and producers. Director were fired. Ron Howard was hired to finish the film. 

 

Now, the director, not anyone else -- creates the tone of the film. UNLESS -- you are making a franchise picture with decades and decades of backstory and baggage. Then the tone is probably set in stone and with that in mind you do what the studio tells you too. On the other hand, the duo directors were well known for their highly improvisational film sets (both the modern 21 Jump Street films).  It’s hard for me to fathom someone hiring directors that are known for improvising vast portions of their film and then -- fire them for improvising vast portions of your film.

 

I call this one: Partially reasonable.

 

Director: Gareth Edwards. Movie: Rogue One

 

Technically, Edwards was not fired from the set of Rogue One but he certainly wasn’t in charge of the reshoots -- of the film he directed. Instead, Tony Gilroy (writer/ director: Michael Clayton, screenwriter: The Bourne Trilogy) was assigned to retask Rogue One to make it less grim and give it an entirely new ending. There are enough stories leaked from the set and the editing studio to suggest that a full thirty percent of the film was rewritten and reshot, with the majority of the film’s storyline being rearranged in the final edit.   

 

Disney never confirmed much regarding the hiring of Gilroy and on the movie's changes other than a generic, “All movies have reshoots,”  but -- why would you not let the director of your film -- direct the reshoots? Of the film he directed?  

 

There really is only one answer -- Disney was not confident Edwards was the right director for the job (or, perhaps, in the first place).

 

Word on the interwebs is that Edwards just went too far in making his gritty, realistic space war movie and ignored the principal reason he was there -- to make a Star Wars movie. So Disney brought in someone else to do it "right."

 

Edwards worked on this film for three years. I find it unlikely that, suddenly, at the very end of principal photography, execs at Lucasfilm were like, “Wait-a-minute! This isn’t what we wanted.” How the hell did it take execs two years of pre production, an entire year of principal photography and then multiple edits in order to figure this out?  Besides, Edwards delivered the film -- he always told Disney he was going to deliver! From day one Edwards called it a “gritty, realistic space war film.” And then he gave Disney just that.

 

And then they gave his job to someone else.

 

I call this one: A mixed bag but probably; partially reasonable.

 

Director -- Colin Trevorrow, Writer -- Jack Thorne. Movie: Star Wars Episode IX.

 

Back full circle. Another director fired. Another screenwriter fired. According to The Hollywood Reporter, Trevorrow (Safety Not Guaranteed, Jurassic World) turned in multiple drafts but no one at Disney was satisfied with the work.

 

So they brought in another writer, English playwright and TV scriptwriter, Jack Thorne (Harry Potter and the Cursed Child, Skins, Shameless). When Disney decided to let Trevorrow go for “creative differences,” Abrams stepped in and teamed with screenwriter Chris Terrio (writer: Argo, Batman vs. Superman and Justice League), which means Thorne was let go.

 

Disney is being very tight lipped about all the changes up to and including the recent Star Wars Episode IX shake up. No one knows, yet, if any work from the Trevorrow / Thorne drafts will be kept or if everything will be trashed and Abrams / Terrio will start from scratch.

 

Another Disney-Lucasfilm dust up. To be honest, I'm sure there will be many more to come. 

 

I call this one: Not enough information to judge. Yet.

 

Star Wars: The Last Jedi will be released December 15th, 2017.


Star Wars: Episode IX will be released December 20th, 2019.

 

--

 

Media giant, Larry King, reveals he underwent surgery this summer to treat lung cancer.

The 83-year-old veteran broadcaster and TV host said, in an interview with US Weekly, that a routine check up revealed an abnormal chest x-ray that was followed up with a CT scan and later PET scan.  The result was early stage lung cancer.

 

In July, King had a stage I cancerous mass removed at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles and was back to work within a week.

 

King suffered a heart attack in 1987 and hadn’t smoked since.  Prior to quitting he had been smoking three packs a day.  Since then, he’s been diligent with his annual check-ups stating, “I’ve gone through a lot in life – I’ve had a heart attack and heart surgery. Part of my checkup is the chest X-ray, and that is the protocol.”  King referred to his bypass surgery after his heart attack, managing diabetes, and undergoing radiation treatment for prostate cancer over the years.

 

King suggests the cancer was not a metastasis to the lung but rather a primary lung cancer.  In the US interview, he stated, “the doctor said that tobacco from 30 years ago is still related to this lung cancer.”

 

It’s true. Although lung cancer risk drops dramatically the longer one avoids tobacco products, the resulting tissue damage, injury to one’s immune response, and genetic mutations may persist.  Moreover, lung cancer can occur even in non-smokers.

 

Early lung cancer can be silent.  As it progresses, however, symptoms such as chronic cough, wheeze, blood in sputum, lethargy and weight loss can ensue.

 

But Larry King won’t let this hold him back. He’s currently working on the sixth season of Larry King Now.

 

larry king and I.jpg

Larry King and Dr. Daliah Talkers Los Angeles 2011


 

--

LearnHealthSpanish.com / Medical Spanish made easy.

 

 

Daliah Wachs is a guest contributor to GCN news.  Doctor Wachs is an MD,  FAAFP and a Board Certified Family Physician.    The Dr. Daliah Show , is nationally syndicated M-F from 11:00 am - 2:00 pm and Saturday from Noon-1:00 pm (all central times) at GCN.

Boston Red Sox starting pitcher David Price, backed by some members of his team, humiliated NESN broadcaster Dennis Eckersley on the team’s chartered plane because Eckersley uttered the word “yuck” in response to Boston pitcher Eduardo Rodriguez’s poor stats that were displayed onscreen during the broadcast of a Red Sox game.


 

This was originally published at FoulPlaybyPlay.com, a community of foul-mouthed sports broadcasters and bloggers.


Price’s ire with Eckersley has been apparently building because Eckersley rarely visits the clubhouse. But Eckersley’s job isn’t to buddy-up with the Boston Red Sox. His job is to provide entertaining, insightful commentary during games, and sometimes that insight must be critical of the home team. It’s a lot harder to remain objectively critical of your friends, which is likely why Eckersley stays out of the clubhouse.

We all deal with criticism at work, but most of that criticism is kept inside the office and not broadcasted on live television. As a journalist for more than six years, I can somewhat relate to the criticism baseball players and other athletes deal with on a regular basis. Publishing an opinion in the newspaper is not unlike stating an opinion on television or radio, except the response isn’t immediate. I’ve had multiple responses to opinions I’ve published in the editorial sections of newspapers throughout Montana, and as an atheist socialist in a red state, none of them were in support of my opinion. That’s the risk you take in being critical.

I’ve also been threatened with violence for reporting a story, so I feel Eckersley’s pain. Like Eckersley, I didn’t get attached to the players I covered for fear of losing the relative objectivity required to be critical of them when it was necessary (and it becomes necessary more often than not). But NESN won’t defend Eckersley like a newspaper editor defends a reporter because the Red Sox pay the bills, and if a broadcaster isn’t on speaking terms with a star player, it makes it hard for the broadcaster to do his or her job. David Price sells NESN -- not Dennis Eckersley.

We run into similar issues at GCN. We have about 80 shows broadcasted from a satellite on the roof, and while just the hosts of our sports show, View From The Couch, are GCN employees, the network still has to keep the show hosts happy because the show hosts pay the bills.

Eckersley could be loved by NESN viewers and lose his job because David Price doesn’t like him. Judging by his interview with WEEI’s Rob Bradford, he might just resign or retire at year’s end given how tough this season’s been on him. He said he won’t change the way he broadcasts games, but Price thinks he’s been more positive since the incident.

This is a common struggle for local newspapers. Fans want to be reassured. They want to know things will improve and that the team is learning from its mistakes. As a sportswriter for many a bad team, I can tell you I’ve dug deep for positives in games that had very few. Sometimes it’s focusing on the important minutes young players got to play during garbage time. But you never ignore the mistakes. You can treat them as learning experiences for so long, but at some point after the same mistakes are repeated multiple times, it’s hard not to be critical of the team or player who doesn’t seem to be learning from the mistakes.

I can understand taking offense to public defamation, but delivering a derogatory comment on a player’s statistics is not public defamation. Commenting on performance is Eckersley’s job description as a commentator, as is painting the Red Sox in a favorable light that helps sell NESN. With 23 years of Major League pitching experience, he’s certainly qualified to comment on the performance of a pitcher. And while we’d all hope more insightful commentary could be provided than “yuck,” the comment is hardly insensitive. “The Red Sox are hoping those numbers are an aberration and not the new norm,” would have been better, but Eckersley was probably reacting to the statistics in real time. He didn’t have time to think of a way to present his reaction in a positive light.

It makes you wonder what Price would have done to Eckersley had he commented on how Price hasn’t lived up to the seven-year, $217 million contract he signed with Boston as a free agent prior to the 2016 season. Immediately upon signing the deal, Price’s ERA+ dropped from a career high of 164 in 2015 to 111 in 2016. A comment on Price’s lack of playoff success might have ended in violence (2-8, 5.54 ERA). Injuries have limited Price to just 66 innings on the mound this season, just the second of the seven-year deal paying him more than $30 million annually.

The moment local sports broadcasts stop being critical of local sports teams is the moment local sports broadcasters become the team’s public relations personnel instead of sports journalists. If Price’s idea of a purely positive, local broadcast is the future of sports broadcasting, I’ll take my baseball on mute.

--

If you like this you might like these GCN Live talk radio shows: View From The Couch