If Only...

President Bush could also sue Michael Moore like this brave war veteran for the lies, misrepresentations, and overall anti-American BS in Moore's most beloved documentary. Sgt. Peter Damon was in the National Guard and lost both arms in the Iraq War. Yet he still supports the effort... (I know this will baffle our liberal readers, almost as much as how tax cuts for the "rich" bring in more tax revenues... but I hope they just skip this one and don't tax their small minds too much... pardon the pun.)

According to the article, Damon is upset because...

"....he's lived his life supportive of his government, he's been a patriot, he's been a soldier, and he's now being portrayed in a movie that is the antithesis of all of that," Damon's lawyer, Dennis Lynch, said.

In his lawsuit, Damon says he "agrees with and supports the President and the United States' war effort, and he was not left behind."

What a nut...

Algore warns the "end of civilization" might be near if we don't do something to stop global warming... As has been previously discussed on this blog, we don't believe that man has any effect on the earth's temperature. (Were the SUVs and factories also to blame for past ice ages and our coming out of them? Haven't we been warming since the last ice age ended? Where is the climate data prior to 150 years ago for us to actually compare whether we should be worried about the earth's temperature increasing 1 degree over the last 100 years, or take it as part of a natural, cyclical change in climate that has always been occuring since the earth was formed? I could go on, but don't want to keep pointing out the obvious. For past blogging on this issue, click here and scroll down to our "Global Warming Reminder" post.)

Why is Algore treated differently than any crazy preacher telling us the world is going to end because we except gays or other such nonsense? How big is this elitest man's ego that he thinks man can alter the climate of the earth? He's the worst environmentalist whacko out there. He makes blowing up car dealerships seem tame. And what's the liberal media do? Report as if he's actually making valid points, rave about his ridiculous little propaganda flick, and gush about his considerations to run again for president. Can you imagine --President Whacko? Yikes.

Grave Disappointment

The Pistons are letting us down; not sure what happened last night. But one thing has been clear throughout this series --Miami wants to win a lot more than we do. That has been perfectly evident.

Like the Red Wings, our Pistons looked so unstoppable through the regular season and decided come playoff time that they didn't really care that much about winning another championship. Through the regular season, you couldn't find any team better than the Pistons --and I don't just mean their record. They truly played as a team; there were no superstars, no egos, just team. To see what they've become --publically blaming their coach for their post-season lackluster performance-- is pathetic. Is their coach the one shooting below 30% in some of these games?

Before all this, I'd have believed them capable of anything --even coming back from a 3-1 deficit. Now I'm just hoping they put us out of our misery; I can't stomach watching another game like last night's.

Bush & Blair - An Admirable Team

Of course to the press core salivating at the Bush-Blair press conference last night, the most important question was to demand what each thought their great mistakes had been concerning the Iraq war. President Bush had the humility and honesty to remark that some of his tough talk (which I loved as being so very American, i.e. "Bring it on" and "wanted, dead or alive") was not viewed favorably by the international community or guilt-ridden, America-hating liberals. Maybe those were not the most responsible choice of words for the leader of the free world to use. And of course, he mentioned Abu Gharab. So the reporters and liberal pundits got their headlines --Bush and Blair admit mistakes and/or we didn't hear anything "new."

They just don't get it. They don't understand that they didn't hear anything "new" because the strong convictions of these two leaders have not wavered or changed. Two allies of different political thought and philosophy have come together, despite strong opposition in each of their countries, to do what they believe is the right thing. They have stood united on this issue since the beginning. Do you think they've been acting for public approval? Do you think they care about polls? They care about protecting democracy and freedom and fighting the war on terror in such as way as to preserve ours. As Blair pointed out last night --the terrorists understand the significance of this battle. Why don't we?

Another Stike by the Wicked Media of the West

Yes, they're at it again. This time reporting that House Speaker Dennis Hastert is under Justice Department investigation for a bribery probe. This statement has been proved false; the Justice Dept. has denied Hastert is under investigation. However, ABC is "sticking by" its false story.

(Does this sound like deja vu to anyone else... just change the letters to CBS, Bush national guard... And, like that story, the Lefty blogs will be running mad with Hastert's supposed corruption, probably completely ignorant of the fact that the charge turned out to be false. After all, what's an inconvenient fact when you can rabidly blather about more "culture of corrpution!" or Bush "lying.")

I'm proud that Hastert appears to be fighting back, hopefully pursuing legal action against ABC. When will they learn???

Perhaps they would have been better off talking about real corruption, rather than wished for Republican wrongs, such as the very real investigation of William Jefferson, (a Democrat!) who was caught taking bribe money on video tape. See, they wouldn't be sued or ridiculed by reporting on factual investigations, rather than ardently hoped for ones.

Misguided worries by a ridiculous Democrat

Yes, I'm talking about that esteemed former secretary of state, the fair Madeleine Albright. Apparently, she's very concerned that President Bush's faith is "alienating Muslims around the world." (I wonder if she is as concerned about say, Saddam, Hamas, or the Freak of Iran alienating Jewish and Christians around the world by calling for jihad against our evil, Western ways and the all-out destruction of Isreal?)

She also believes that what Bush views as the difference between good and evil is different from that of better Christians like Jimmah Carter and Bill Clinton. (I don't know about you, but I definitely think Clinton is more faithful than Bush- my minister is always telling me how it's OK to sexually assault people and cheat on your spouse). I guess it must have been Bush's religion that told him a dictator who murdered and tortured his own people and paid the families of suicide bombers who killed Israelis was wrong... My, that is troubling. For me, it was a simple case of human decency and common sense...

BTW, can someone point out to me all of Ms. Albright's shining foreign policy accomplishments? Did she perhaps negotiate Clinton's nuclear secrets for campaign money deal? Or maybe it was her tough stance on terrorism after the Cole bombing or the first WTC attack... oh, wait, nevermind. Oh-- maybe it was her unveiling of the mass corruption plaguing the U.N. No, no, that wasn't her, either. I'm stumped!

LeBron Brilliant in Post Season

Well, if you watched the game on ABC today, you'd know that LeBron James played. Wasn't he great? Wow. The announcers were still pulling for Cleveland up until about the last minute of the game, when they finally said something about the Pistons playing well. Can't wait until that next game when Shaq and Wade of the mighty, great, and from the warm and desireable city of Miami start the eastern conference finals...

79-61. So much for LeBron and his brilliance. Of course, it did take us 7 games, but as Rip said- if it ain't rough, it ain't right.

Detroit Sports Update

Tonight is do or die for our Pistons. We certainly didn't expect to be in this position, especially not in the second round. The Pistons haven't lost three in a row all year; too bad they had to wait for the playoffs to give it a try. I confess, I'm more than a little worried. This team hasn't had any practice playing in must-win situations since last year's playoffs. We'll see how well they can withstand the pressure; they're definitely the better team. Oh, and let's see if Sheed can keep his mouth shut and actually stay in the game this time --we need him.

In other news, and I NEVER thought I'd be saying this. Never. Ever. Hey-- at least we have the Tigers!

An excerpt: The current winning streak, Detroit's longest in 13 years, stands at seven games. Their 27-13 record is their best 40-game start since 35-5 in 1984 -- the year of their last eight-game winning streak.

Yes, that would also be the last year we won the World Series. Hey, I think that hell is finally starting to freeze over... confirmation will come next fall if the Lions have a winning season. We'll see.

Wicked Media of the West Strikes Again

How else do you explain the numbers from this recent Washington Post/ABC poll:
(click here for actual poll questions/results)

The factor that most people (17%) cited as deciding their vote for the U.S. House this year was the economy.

69% of people polled think "things in this country" are generally on the "wrong track/going in the wrong direction"

Yet...

That number drops to 52% when asked the same question about their state

and...

41% (that's 58% "right direction") when asked the same question about their local community.

Oh, but it gets better:

84% of those polled were satisfied or very satisfied with their "overall life at this present time"

89% were optimistic about their own personal future

Despite the MSM's best efforts, 65% were still optimistic about the future of this country (though that's considerably lower than the 89% personal optimism number, and despite the fact that 69% think our country is "going in the wrong direction..." can we say confusion? have we been "misled" by the MSM?)

The 65% optimism number broke down specificially to 52% optimistic about the national economy, 63% optimistic about their local economy, and up to 79% about their own family's financial situation.

Well, congrats to the main stream media for doing its job! Most people now feel that one of the best economies in history is not very good at all; they think 5% interest rates are sky high, and 4.8% unemployment is staggering. They think they're doing OK in their local communities and personal lives, but everyone else across the country is misrably suffering. And, of course, this is all Bush and the Republicans' fault.

In other words, under Bush and a Republican congress, we have the best economy in years, but as the results of this poll show, people think that the economy would be better under Democrats who've done nothing but squawked and caterwauled about how "bad" everything is for the past six years and will do nothing once elected save raise our taxes, thus putting an effective end to our current good economy. (which the media will somehow find a way to blame the Republicans for)

Sometimes ignorance just makes me want to scream! If the American public would get a little historical context and try a little harder not to get their news from such blatantly biased sources, maybe then they could recognize a good economy when they see one.

The same things could be said about the media's impact on our views toward Iraq, as are reflected in this poll, and any number of other issues. It would be laughable if it wasn't so sad.

Shake Up

As Rush points out, Republican-lite/RINOs better remember their base if they want to keep their jobs...

More on incumbant Republicans being voted out in primaries.

We may be between a rock and a hard place. We know voting Democrat isn't the option, but we're not just going to stay home on election day if we're unhappy with our candidate. We take action when we can --at the primary stage.

Perhaps, expanding on points made below, that's why more gets done by Republican than Democrat politicians. The people that elect them demand it. We'll still throw our bums out.

Democracy at work

It's refreshing to see our elected representatives listening to and acting on behalf of the will of the people. Most Americans favor legislation to strengthen our border to the south. After all, they do have to answer to us in their next election. The Senate voted today 83-16 to build a massive fence and vehicle barriers along our border with Mexico. Looks like a great first step. And, as I say below, just another issue we're actually doing something about besides talking during this Bush administration.

The Speech

I'd like to caveat this by saying that I did not give my full attention to Bush's immigration speech last night, as I would have had there not been a most-disappointing Pistons game on at the same time.

Overall, from what I saw, my reaction was rather blah. It didn't knock my socks off. 6,000 national guard troops on the border does not seem sufficient. I'd like to know why we can control the borders of other countries across the world (the two Koreas, etc.) but can't seem to sufficiently control ours. I liked what he said in general about everything else, but nothing will work if you don't first secure the border. At the end of the day, though, it's up to those jerks in Congress to agree on a good bill and get it before the president to sign. As Dubya said, the bill has to include methods of dealing with all aspects of the issue, not just border security and not just a guest worker program. As unhappy as I am about all of the illegals already here, rounding them up and deporting them isn't realistic. Again, I wish I could provide more thorough analysis, but I was distracted...

In other news, CNN "accidently" embarrassed the president. Yes, this was about as accidental as CBS's national guard story and CNN's X over Cheney's face. These guys are pathetic.

But apparently, the majority of people who watched the speech felt positively about it. Though since this article is from CNN.com, you have to scroll through paragraph upon paragraph of negative before you get to the "mixed results" column. The "mix" was apparently that only 42% of those polled felt positively about Dubya's immigration plan prior to the speech; that number jumped to 67% after the speech. Now, as an objective person, would you call that "mixed results" or would you say that the president's speech had a positive effect upon those who watched it? Just asking...

Another thing I found surprising... apparently TV ratings were higher for the President's speech than ABC and Fox regular programming same time last week. That's refreshing --usually people would rather watch mindless TV sitcoms than our president speak on an important issue facing our country. (Though I will say, he's lucky he didn't have to compete with American Idol...)

Whatever you thought about the speech, at least Dubya helped bring more attention to the issue and put the pressure on Congress. We have the Minute Men to thank, in my opinion, for our government even talking about much-needed immigration reform. Let's hope Congress can pass something comprehensive soon.

One thing you have to love about Dubya (or hate, depending on your party) is that at least he gets things done. We debate real issues with Republicans in charge. Name ONE major policy that was changed or accomplished under Clinton. (and the welfare reform Newt and the GOP House forced down his throat does not count) Now look at Bush --we've had tax cuts, he's tried to fix medicare and social security (thanks Democrats for putting the breaks on there), he's addressed our failing schools --sure, maybe No Child Left Behind isn't perfect and needs some adjustments, but at least we're doing something to stop schools from graduating idiots that can't pass basic knowledge tests-- we've toppled the Taliban in Afghanistan, we've removed a ruthless dictator and liberated thousands upon thousands of Arabs in the Middle East, we've exposed corruption in the U.N. and demanded reform, now we're tackling our border security and illegal immigration problem. I'm sure there's more I'm missing because I'm so tired right now...

My point is, think of every campaign you've heard for the past 30 years. What were the issues that the politicians listed as our top concerns? Fixing social security, health care reform, education reform, immigration reform, and national security. The Bush administration has dealt or tried to deal with each and every one of these issues. He didn't just talk about them like other presidents and politicians we've known...

It's real easy for Democrats who have passed no significant legislation to improve the lives of Americans in the past 30 years to sit back and criticize everything Bush and the Republicans try to do. They're pretty harsh on Bush's ideas about immigration and sit back and critique his speech like they're frickin' Ebert the film critic. But where is THEIR plan? What ideas do THEY have?

I haven't been 100% pleased with our GOP congressmen in recent months, but at least with Republicans in charge we get things done. We just don't talk and live in theories and relativities like our counterparts on the Left. Our options now seem to be vote Republican or vote the party of Ultimate Stagnation. It's great to see that Republicans can disagree on certain issues and believe me, we let our representatives know when we're upset, but at the end of the day we still know that there is no other option if we care about this country.

Why We Love Ann

I'd love to expand a little on Coulter's Conservatives Need 12-Step Program to Manhood post just out today. In case you haven't the time to read the entire thing (which I strongly recommend), here are some highlights:

It's pretty pathetic when a Kennedy is too drunk to drive into the Potomac.

Conservatives will continue to be threatened with prison on trumped-up charges until Democrats start having to worry about being prosecuted for minor offenses, too

Democrats have declared war against Republicans, and Republicans are wandering around like a bunch of ninny Neville Chamberlains, congratulating themselves on their excellent behavior. They'll have some terrific stories about their Gandhi-like passivity to share while sitting in cells at Guantanamo after Hillary is elected.

For a political party that grasps the concept of victory against foreign enemies, Republicans can't seem to grasp that concept when it comes to domestic enemies.

Patriotic Americans don't have to become dangerous psychotics like liberals, but they could at least act like men.

Why hasn't the former spokesman for the Taliban matriculating at Yale been beaten even more senseless than he already is?

There is not the remotest possibility that a man who was recently defending shooting women in the head for wearing nail polish will so much as be snubbed on the Yale campus.

From the time I became interested in national politics, even before I was old enough to vote, I've been a Republican. And the thing that always angered me most about my party was that they were just too frickin' nice. I couldn't stand it. Politeness doesn't go very far when your opponents are calling you a racist, bigot, homophobe, lying, deceitful, evil Hitler-esque figure out to crush the poor and take over the world.

How can you defend yourself against attacks such as the rabid left has flung our way for the past, oh, let's see, 30 years? This has been the typical Republican response thus far: "No, I'm not! whah. And I resent your hurtful words. Now, let's work together on that education bill so that we can say we passed something bi-partisian before you go back to calling me a racist liar on Monday."

Republicans are too afraid of being perceived as what they're alreaady accused of to stand up for themselves. Instead they snivel around trying to get along with Democrats, who will go along with Republicans so long as it suits them before stabbing them in the back again. The Left in this country has been brutal, especially since Bush came into office. Frankly, the Republian base so bristled at their attacks of Dubya that they rallied behind him, particuluarly in '04, to come out and reelect him in record numbers. But it's hard for us to continue to rally when the politicians we're supporting cannot find the strength within themselves to do so.

It's not just the politicians, it's our whole culture. The hypocrisy is staggering. As Ann points out, can you honestly tell me that there are no feminists left at Yale? At liberal Yale? Not one feminist? Not one lady there who was as outraged as I was that women in Afghanistan were being murdured for little things like painting their nails, wearing lipstick, or talking to a man unrelated to them? Where were the womens' rights activists? Why weren't they protesting? Why do Americans pick and choose to support oppressed people only when it suits them? OK, the Africa thing is politically correct --Bono's involved and all, so we'll care about that. But we won't care about misrably oppressed women in Afghanistan or oppression and torture of Iraqis under Saddam Hussein. Not only did no one care about the women in Afghanistan before the war, but now that one of their oppressors is a student at Yale (something I still cannot believe), the students there are too afraid of offending any Taliban-leaning, anti-semetic freaks to show any outrage against him. I've seen interviews of female Yale students who say it's more important to "hear what he has to say" so that we can better "understand him." Frankly, a man that was supportive of murduring women for things like wearing nail polish can go to hell. I don't care to understand anything about him.

Where is this wimpyness coming from? First the femenazis try to take away the manliness of American men. The demasculinization (is that a word? oh, well, I'll make up my own Bushism) spread to our outlook on foreign policy. Now it's threatening Republican law-makers??? Heaven help us if we all don't get some common sense knocked into us soon. And if Republicans fail to stand up for themselves and put on the gloves against their Democratic rivals, that common sense hit upside the head will come in the form of a major Democratic victory this November.

It's about time...

...we had a press secratary like Tony Snow. You tell 'em, Tony!

In the words of a true sage...

Peggy Noonan. An amazingly intelligent woman. Great article about Republicans losing touch with their base. I'm sure you've sensed some discontent from this Sage about our "leaders" in Congress who seem to have forgotten who elected them and for what reason. We did not vote for them because we wanted Democrat-Lite.

An excerpt:

Name the political problem, we could answer it, or work toward answering it, with political solutions.

But faith in political action has been damaged the past few years, not by outside forces but by the two major political parties themselves.

If you are a normal person with the normal amount of political awareness, you might see it this way:

The Republicans talk about cutting spending, but they increase it--a lot. They stand for making government smaller, but they keep making it bigger. They say they're concerned about our borders, but they're not securing them. And they seem to think we're slobs for worrying. Republicans used to be sober and tough about foreign policy, but now they're sort of romantic and full of emotionalism. They talk about cutting taxes, and they have, but the cuts are provisional, temporary. Beyond that, there's something creepy about increasing spending so much and not paying the price right away but instead rolling it over and on to our kids, and their kids.

So, the normal voter might think, maybe the Democrats. But Democrats are big spenders, Democrats are big government, Democrats will roll the cost onto our kids, and on foreign affairs they're--what? Cynical? Confused? In a constant daily cringe about how their own base will portray them? All of the above.

Where does such a voter go, and what does such a voter do? It is odd to live in the age of options, when everyone's exhausted by choice, and feel your options for securing political progress are so limited. One party has beliefs it doesn't act on. The other doesn't seem to have beliefs, only impulses.

Iran's Temper Tantrum

Atlas Shrugs has a nice post breaking down the recent letter from that freak running Iran. One excerpt:

There's more, much more "islamic teachings" but I'm not running it.

Liberalism and Western style democracy have not been able to help realize the ideals ofhumanity. Today these two concepts have failed. Those with insight can already hear the sounds of the shattering and fall of the ideology and thoughts of the liberal democratic systems.

And finally, the call to arms;

Whether we like it or not, the world is gravitating towards faith in the Almighty and justice and the will of God will prevail over all things.

What I want to know is --where is the ACLU and the other Lefties with their outrage? (Well, of course, they would agree with The Freak's statement about western democracy not realizing the ideals of humanity...) But what about "the world is gravitating toward faith in the Almighty, etc." See, if a Christian said something like that, they'd be lambasted for their ignorance, etc., etc. But we have to take these Islamic fanatics seriously because we have to respect their religion. And I'm sure if The Freak (have you noticed, I don't care what his name is? He's going to be referred to from now on by me simply as "The Freak") tried to bomb us or Isreal in the name of Allah, the Lefties would be opposed to us fighting back. Maybe that's an exaggeration, but if we were to try a pre-emptive strike based on threats that The Freak plans to bomb us or Isreal, make no mistake they'll all be falling behind Cindy Sheehan to protest our "imperial" actions... Sad. Let's hope it never comes to that.

Second Highest Tax Revenue in HISTORY

This brief article says is all:

A flood of income tax payments pushed up government receipts to the second-highest level in history in April, giving the country a sizable surplus for the month.

What? Did we read that right? Are tax revenues UP? But I thought that all of these "tax cuts for the rich" were hurting us and adding to our deficit? I thought that with everything we're spending on the war and with our growing deficit we absolutely needed to raise taxes for everyone, especially those evil "rich" (like the two married teachers whose combined income qualifies them for the alternative minimum tax)?

But John Kerry, say it ain't so! Feinstein? Swimmer? oh, no, he's got bigger issues right now... How about Biden? Pelosi? Oh, I'm sure Chucky Schumer will set me straight again...

On a more serious note, they will of course set us straight. They'll do what they've been doing for the last 50 years. They'll ignore the facts and do everything they can to propegate class warfare to get themselves reelected.

Luckily, there are many of us who know better.

At Least They're Getting Something Done..

Our Republican-controlled Congress may not be able to accomplilsh anything to secure our borders, curtail ambulance-chasing lawyers with liability lawsuit reform, or privatize even 1% of the money we're wasting on social security, but at least they're extending the tax cuts... for two whole years. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad they at least were able to extend them that long, but I fear if the country lapses into a stupor long enough to reelect enough Democrats, not only will those tax cuts expire in two years, we'll probably have a nice increase on top of the old rates to look forward to. Still, we should be glad that none of our thin-skinned GOP members of Congress saw the tax cut extension as a reason to jump after Jim and publically display their disapproval of the president who helped get them elected...

Does anyone still want to argue...

..that Bush and his tax cuts did not help the economy? Come on, anyone? I mean, with a straight face, do you really still want to deny it?

Yep, as the heading of this update states: U.S. economy firing on all cylinders

Yea, capitalism.

Don't Drink and Drive...

...or you run a very good chance, if you're lucky enough not to kill anyone, of winding up cuffed and in jail for the night, followed by thousands of dollars in legal bills as you fight the D.U.I. charge. Around here cops like to circle the bars in the small downtown area where I live. They'll pull you over at the drop of a hat, even if you're obeying every traffic rule, because hey, if you're leaving the bar at 2 a.m., chances are you'll fail a breathalizer test.

Unless, of course, you're a Kennedy. No, then you can swerve, almost hit a police car, then crash into a barrier, and not even be given a sobriety test. You can also drive off a bridge and leave the woman in the car with you to drown in four feet of water while you swim home, and then get reelected to Congress over and over and over and over again so that you can sputter from your pulpit that our president is a "liar."

Ahhh, like father, like son. Well, we'll see how this on ends up...

UPDATE: Links to the police report...

Because we need others to tell us how to live our lives....

This might not be the best example, but Detroit's city counsel just banned cell phones while driving, following the lead of many other communist-leaning states. This irks me. I'm a very good driver and I can talk on my phone and drive perfectly fine. And the idiots that do weave around, drive 10 under the limit, or slam on their breaks, etc. whilst on the cell because they can't talk and drive are probably just lousy drivers in the first place.

Is it just me or does it seem like every time I turn around the government is passing another law telling us how to live our lives? On the local news this morning they were talking about how school vending machines will only serve diet pop or sports drinks, or other "healthier" food. Yeah, but what about the really skinny kid with the speedy metabolism that just frickin wants a regular pop? And of course, there are the smoking bans everywhere. Don't leave it up to the individual businesses to decide what appeals most to their particular clientale. No, let's just ban it everywhere because it's bad for you (and if you're California, we'll even ban it from all outdoor, public places). Oh, and let's pass an eminent domain law because the government is better suited to decide what developer is more lucrative than the measly property taxes you're currently paying. Then throw in the PETA freaks who want us to stop eating meat, which I don't think will lead to any governmental regulatons. But then, who knows in today's world? If enough people decide they don't like the tast of lamb and it's "cruel" to kill the cute little lambs and they get the global warming scientists to declare that there's really no health benefit from eating lamb and it could cause cancer if you eat it off a china plate with a floral design (because everything gives you cancer), then the government just might one day decide that since 70% of people are in favor of the lamb ban, they'll vote for it. And if enough people are offended by smelling peoples' breath after eating garlic (second hand garlic!), maybe that will get banned as well.

To sum up, the government wants to tell us where we can live, what we should eat, drink, and not smoke, and what we can do in our cars. What the hell is next? Why don't they just assign our jobs while they're at it?

If Americans care for their freedoms, they need to fight to protect them; Republicans should be leading the charge on this, not pandering like little wimps afraid to offend someone.

For Shame

It's taken me a few days to recover... sorry for the light posting. 3 years in a row. 3 f--ing years in a row. And with the exception of a few (like Zetterberg), the Red Wings should be ashamed. How they can watch their almost 41-year-old injured captain skate as well and with as much heart as he did and not even put forth half of his effort? They let their fans down, they let their owner down, and most importantly, they let their captain down. Giving up four goals in one period was pathetic. Then again, so are the Red Wings in the playoffs.