Month: September 2011

A new feature

A few weeks back I was contacted by an internet entrepreneur who wanted me to try his product. This happens from time to time, but his request was for an interesting reason.

It seems that the creator of SendLove.to had too many liberal websites already signed up and it was skewing his results. Somehow or other he got wind of this site and that it was conservative, and he asked me to install his plugin in order to balance things out.

So I thought, what have I got to lose and I installed it last night. (It was pretty easy, even for me – I’m not really all that much of a WordPress maven.) If you were reading the last dossier I put up and came to it from the Facebook page (thus, going directly to the article instead of through my main page) you may have noticed first that certain names are pretty in pink. In addition there are tabs on the bottom where the comments are with the names Mitt Romney, Nancy Pelosi, Al Sharpton, and others.  You would see the three I mentioned again (and again in pink) if you saw this page as an individual page because SendLove scans a post’s content for certain keywords and highlights them to solicit your opinion on the person. You can simply vote them up or down, or add a comment.

I can see a couple minor bugs in it – for example, it wouldn’t let me get back to a couple of the tabs once I pulled another down – but even just the little bit I played with it was interesting. I can even bring up past articles and it will bring up any name they have in the system, so I just dinged Ben Cardin quite nicely. (Since I brought him into this post now you can too.) And it doesn’t work from the main page, although I’m told they’re working on this. Since a good portion of my traffic comes directly to a post from Facebook, Twitter, or a search engine this isn’t such a bad omission.

Obviously I talk about national issues and political figures quite a bit, so I would imagine regular readers have an opportunity to weigh in a lot about particular people and follow the discussion from post to post (these are not wedded to one post like a normal comment.) I noticed Nancy Pelosi has a high national rating, for example, so my readers are going to have to take care of that.

As I figured would happen after Labor Day passed my readership is back on the upswing. So give this new feature a try and let me know how you like it.

Dossier: Newt Gingrich

Political resume: After two unsuccessful tries in 1974 and 1976, Gingrich won a Congressional seat from Georgia and maintained it (with one move due to a 1990 redistricting) for ten terms. Despite winning an eleventh term earlier that month, he resigned as both Speaker of the House (a post which he served from 1995) and his Congressional seat in November 1998. Newt is also credited with the concept of the “Contract With America,” a platform which made him speaker once over 50 new Republicans were elected to the House in 1994. Newt formed an unofficial exploratory committee for 2012 on March 3rd, formally entering the race May 11. RealClearPolitics.com ranks Gingrich sixth of nine major contenders, but his support has steadily eroded from being a frontrunner to around 4 percent.

On campaign finance/election reform (three points): While serving in the House, Newt had a solid voting record on campaign finance so I’m giving him two points. I don’t think his positions have softened, but haven’t heard the bold sort of statement on the subject that others have made out of him.

On property rights (five points): Overturning the Kelo decision would be a good start on Gingrich‘s agenda, and I can give him all five points for that and defending property rights while in Congress.

On the Second Amendment (seven points): “It’s not in defense of hunting, it’s not in defense of target shooting or collecting. The Second Amendment is defense of freedom from the state.” So said Newt, and he tended to vote that way while in Congress. But there is something in this piece that gives me pause, so I’m only giving him six of seven points.

On education (eight points): Gingrich touches on education in a minor way on his website, but the person who now talks about abolishing the Department of Education voted for its very creation. And in 2009 he was only too happy to join Al Sharpton on a tour to “highlight the Obama administration’s efforts to reform public education.” I think he’d like to continue the federal framework which needs to be abolished, and that’s not a solution I believe in. I’m giving him no points because I don’t think he stands with me on this.

On the Long War/veterans affairs (nine points): Generally, Newt has a pretty good idea of what we need to enhance our national security and win the Long War, so I’m giving him eight points.

On immigration (eleven points): It’s telling that, aside from the usual mantra of “secure our borders,” Newt doesn’t talk about immigration on his campaign site. Maybe it’s because he’s pandering to the so-called Latino vote? I can only give him two points, and that’s in part credit for some past votes. He may think differently now.

On energy independence (twelve points): Gingrich and his “American Energy Plan” is solid, except for one flaw: he wants to use oil and gas royalties to “finance cleaner energy research.” While I like the introduction of “loser pays” on environmental lawsuits into the discussion, the idea that we should give research grants out like candy and pick winners and losers via government rubs me the wrong way. Because of that philosophical difference and his commercial with Nancy Pelosi, he gets downgraded slightly to seven points.

On entitlements (thirteen points): I have a big problem with some of Newt‘s so-called solutions because they begin with the argument that the current Medicare/Medicaid model just needs to be tweaked, with government remaining firmly in control. It’s the replacement of Obamacare he calls for rather than a repeal. I don’t buy it as “fundamental reform.” And this from the guy who got welfare reform passed? His record on Social Security is a start, but doesn’t go far enough. He gets only three points.

On trade and job creation (fourteen points): Newt is an advocate of free trade, which is a plus because it creates offshore markets. He also has a broad plan for job creation which keys on tax reform along with streamlining regulations, which I’ll return to in a moment. Generally I have given candidates who exhibit these traits nine points, but Newt goes a step further in that he’d like to return to Reagan-era monetary policies. So he gets ten points.

On taxation and the role of government (fifteen points): To put it mildly, Newt is an enigma. Just look at his economic plan: he cheers me to some extent by advocating a flat 15 percent tax, but only makes it optional. He’d like to repeal Obamacare – but replace it with something else. Same goes for the EPA, which he would like to replace with an “Environmental Solutions Agency.” The problem with reform and replace is that eventually the same old problems creep up again, and I’ve already noted before that Newt is big on federal solutions to problems – I guess one can expect that from a Beltway insider. He has the ability to think outside the box, but doesn’t use it anymore and that’s extremely disappointing. Four points.

Intangibles (up to three points): We know that Newt has a marriage problem, which isn’t necessarily a strike against him in my eyes but could be to many others. On the other hand, he is pro-life. So these two cancel each other out. He’s also made it clear that he would appoint strict constitutionalist jurists, which adds a point since not all candidates state this up front. Newt nets one point.

Continue reading “Dossier: Newt Gingrich”

Dossier: Herman Cain

Political resume: Cain has run for President before, back in 2000. More recently, he ran to be a U.S. Senator from Georgia in 2004 and placed second in a three-person primary. He announced his exploratory committee on January 12, 2011, becoming one of the first to officially enter the fray, and made it official May 21. Currently according to RealClearPolitics.com he polls in seventh place of the top nine who get one percent or more in the polls, sixth among declared candidates. His poll numbers have slowly declined over the last few weeks, though.

On campaign finance/election reform (three points): Cain noted in Politico that “civil rights groups encourage voter fraud by opposing voter identification bills…all they’re trying to do is protect the voter fraud they know is going on.” He’s got the right idea so I’m giving him all three points.

On property rights (five points): He hasn’t said much on the subject yet, and aside from a  brief mention of property seizure portions of the Dodd-Frank financial reform bill on his issues page, there’s not much to go on. I’ll give him one point.

On the Second Amendment (seven points): Herman says he’s in favor of the Second Amendment, but a recent interview made people wonder if he was placing the issue too far into the lap of the states. I’m not quite sure what he means either, so I’m only going to give him four points. I think he’s on the right side, but I certainly don’t want a liberal state like Maryland overriding the clear language and intent of the Second Amendment.

On education (eight points): While Cain wants to “unbundle” the federal government from education and has a number of valid ideas about accountability and school choice, the one thing holding him back is not openly advocating for the elimination of the Department of Education – that’s a necessary component in my book. Six points.

On the Long War/veterans affairs (nine points): Herman isn’t all that specific on the issue, but sounds a good tone on Afghanistan. Still, I can’t give him more than six of nine points.

On immigration (eleven points): Cain promises to “secure our borders, enforce our laws, and promote the existing path to citizenship.” That’s all well and good, but more detail would be helpful. Assisting his cause is that he stood foursquare against amnesty. I think he’ll get nine points.

On energy independence (twelve points): He seems to be an advocate for free-market solutions, and that’s precisely what we need. Key among his statements is that private industry needs to take the lead on alternative energy, which shows a good understanding of government’s role. Again, I’d like a little more specifics on the solution, which keeps Cain from hitting all twelve points – he gets eleven.

On entitlements (thirteen points): He starts down the right road, but doesn’t go all the way down it. Moreover, he advocates more tinkering with the tax code and that conflicts with some of his other positions. Nevertheless, Cain has the right ideas about who should be the safety net, though, so I’ll give him nine points.

On trade and job creation (fourteen points): The problem with this category for Cain is that it intersects so greatly with the next category because the linchpin of his job creation strategy is to lower taxes. So I’ll give him nine points here because he’s a relative free trader and wants to cut business taxes and regulation to stimulate the economy.

On taxation and the role of government (fifteen points): Here is where Cain shines most, as he’s devised what he calls the 999 Plan. It would cut business taxes to a flat 9 percent rate, cut individual income taxes to (you guessed it) a 9% rate, and finally begin the changeover to a system we’ve long been crying out for – a modest consumption-based tax of nine percent. The eventual goal is a full transition to the FairTax. The only quibble I have with Cain’s plan is the use of what he calls “empowerment zones” – unfortunately the government picks winners and losers there and that’s not right. He still gets 14 points.

Intangibles (up to three points): While Herman has stated he’s pro-life, believes in traditional marriage, and stands with Israel it’s tempered by his support for maintaining an outmoded affirmative action program. He still nets two points.

Continue reading “Dossier: Herman Cain”

Romney gains Maryland support (and Pawlenty’s, too)

This news didn’t come to me directly, but it is legitimate: I found it on Mitt Romney’s website too.

Mitt Romney today won the support from leaders in Maryland.

“It is an honor to have the support of so many in Maryland,” said Mitt Romney. “They share my goals in this campaign to reverse President Obama’s failed policies and get our economy moving again. I look forward to working with them as I bring this message to Maryland and the American people.”

Announcing his support, State Senator Richard Colburn said, “Mitt Romney has a proven record of creating jobs and cutting spending. President Obama has failed on these points and it has hurt the American economy. Mitt Romney has the much-needed experience to lead our country toward an economic recovery.”

Maryland Leaders Endorsing Mitt Romney:

  • State Senator Richard Colburn
  • State Senator Joe Getty
  • State Senator Allan Kittleman
  • Delegate Kathryn Afzali
  • Delegate John Cluster
  • Delegate Addie Eckardt
  • Delegate Donald Elliott
  • Delegate Michael Hough
  • Delegate Nic Kipke
  • Delegate Steven Schuh
  • Former United States Ambassador to New Zealand Robert Goodwin
  • National Committeeman Louis Pope
  • National Committeewoman Joyce Terhes
  • 2010 Republican Candidate for Lieutenant Governor and Former Secretary of State Mary Kane
  • Former Maryland Republican Party Chairman John Kane
  • Former Maryland Republican Party Chairman Audrey Scott
  • Former Maryland Republican Party First Vice Chair Chris Cavey
  • Former Maryland Republican Party First Vice Chair Chuck Gast
  • Maryland Republican Party Treasurer Christopher Rosenthal
  • Garrett County Republican Party Chairman Brenda Butcsher
  • Howard County Republican Party Chairman Loretta Shields
  • Montgomery County Republican Party Chairman Mark Uncapher
  • Frederick County Councilman Paul Smith
  • Howard County Councilman Greg Fox
  • State Central Committee Member – St. Mary’s County Mary Russell

Well, you won’t find my name on that list – it’s pretty safe to say that Mitt isn’t among my top picks. I see him as 2012’s answer to John McCain. Obviously, these 25 feel differently and that’s fine. Aside from Senator Colburn’s brief statement sure to draw a primary challenger in 2014, I don’t know what led the others to support him so I can’t really pass judgement on their intentions.

Continue reading “Romney gains Maryland support (and Pawlenty’s, too)”

David Craig (hearts) the Maryland conservative blogosphere

A headshot of Harford County Executive David Craig, provided by his 2014 campaign.

On Friday evening I, along with a number of other Maryland political bloggers, was invited to a confab with current Harford County Executive and likely 2014 statewide candidate David Craig.

Now unlike a lot of events, I chose beforehand not to provide a blow-by-blow account of the proceedings. I intentionally didn’t bring a notepad because I figured there weren’t going to be a lot of detailed questions or answers. I was sort of wrong, but that’s okay – why should I write the same thing four or five others may write? So what you’ll read are my observations of the evening, with a few pertinent items tossed in from memory.

Let me begin with a roster of the other bloggers who attended – there were six of us. I was told that there were about a dozen or so invited, but the list of non-attendees seems to be guarded like a state secret. And that’s fine, because I was just curious when I asked.

Besides yours truly, those who came in to Annapolis for dinner and conversation were Greg Kline and Brian Griffiths from Red Maryland, Bryan Sears and Brad Gerick from Patch.com, and Richard Cross, who does Cross Purposes. (He beat me to the punch with his thoughts on the evening.) It was a cordial conference with Craig and four of his staffers, and the conversations were broad in scope and depth around various parts of the table.

Besides dinner, we all received a party favor: the picture you see at the opening of the article comes from a flash drive Craig provided with his 2014 logo on the outside and various photos, background information, and news articles on the inside. Obviously it will be more useful once the 2012 election is over and Craig decides on whether he’ll seek the post of Governor, Comptroller, or Congressman – if I were a betting man I’d say that in rank order it’s about a 70-25-5 probability for which office he’ll run (the 70% being Governor.)

It was interesting how my fellow bloggers handled the evening. Sears (and to a lesser extent Gerick) treated this like an interview, asking pointed questions of the candidate about a number of statewide issues. Obviously Cross was taking some notes as well, while Kline and I did more listening. (Brian Griffiths came late since the Maryland GOP Executive Committee meeting was held down the street simultaneously to our gathering and he was representing the Maryland Young Republicans there.)

It’s funny that much of my direct conversation with Craig came when we talked about – baseball. He’s obviously familiar with the struggles of the O’s minor league system since the Aberdeen IronBirds play in his county and he could relate to my feelings about the Shorebirds. On the other hand, I wasn’t enthused about his ideas for league realignment but liked his stance on the designated hitter – indeed, it needs to go.

Continue reading “David Craig (hearts) the Maryland conservative blogosphere”

Is redistricting a done deal?

Well, perhaps, and that’s how my sentiments lean when it comes to the question of redistricting in Maryland.

But Saturday around 30 interested observers sat in the brand-new Perdue School of Business at Salisbury University to listen to eight observers testify before the three members of the Redistricting Advisory Committee who could be present – while Chair Jeannie Hitchcock, President of the Maryland Senate Mike Miller, and board member Richard Stewart were there, board members James King and Speaker of the House of Delegates Michael Busch were unable to attend. The size of the room made the crowd look smaller, too. While Hitchcock said the group was “here to listen, primarily” I noticed some of the members seemed a bit disinterested at times.

Out of eight speakers, five of them represented Democratic interests while the other three (including myself) were Republicans. However, there was one piece of common ground expressed by both sides, that being the issue of resident Delegates. As you’ll read, though, the ideas on how to achieve this were somewhat different.

Continue reading “Is redistricting a done deal?”

A decade passed

Almost every year since I began this website I have taken time on September 11 to remember what happened ten years ago this morning, and this year will be no different. Obviously the memory remains as we have now gone through a decade of history since that fateful late summer day – a sunny day in New York and over much of the East Coast and Midwest as I recall.

I have shared my story on many occasions, and have heard a number of others describe what they experienced when a regular, humdrum Tuesday morning suddenly became anything but. It’s my generation’s answer to Pearl Harbor Day, although as the so-called “greatest generation” slowly passes away into history fewer are around to describe their emotions when a midday Sunday (since we are several hours ahead of Hawaii timewise) turned into “a date that will live in infamy.”

And as time goes on it’s more and more apparent that many of us have retreated to what can be called a “9/10 lifestyle,” forgetting that we’re in the midst of a Long War against the forces of radical Islam. There’s no doubt in my mind that if those same groups believed they could get away with a plot to murder thousands or even millions of Americans with one surprise attack, they would take the opportunity. Granted, since the advent of the Atomic Age we have had that sort of threat hanging over our collective heads but this situation is different for in the eyes of believers martyrdom is not something to be avoided – the theory of mutually assured destruction which kept the Cold War with the Soviet Union cold – but a desired result. The nineteen who hijacked four planes on that fateful day were sure they’d never see September 12 but believed they would spend eternity in their version of paradise because they were in Allah’s service.

Continue reading “A decade passed”

Testimony before Redistricting Advisory Committee

These were my remarks as prepared for today’s hearing of the Maryland Redistricting Advisory Committee hearing at Salisbury University.

Good afternoon.

My name is Michael Swartz and I am a citizen of Maryland by choice, having moved here in 2004.

Because of my tardy timing in realizing this can be a great place to live, I missed out on the last redistricting battle ten years ago. All I know is that the whole affair ended up in court because the original plan was far too egregious for even political partisans to be able to defend, so it was changed around the edges to the map we have now. It’s a map which, sadly, divides a number of counties like a vast jigsaw puzzle, placing neighbors who might have a lot in common into different political districts because some Annapolis or Washington politician looked at voter registration data and wanted a seat which was safe for their re-election prospects until he or she wished to retire.

And from many accounts, it seems to me that the goal of redistricting in Maryland is once again not to empower the people or bring about a truly representative small-r republican state, but to reward certain politicians and punish those who don’t toe a particular party line.

I’m here to speak about both Congressional and state legislative redistricting, so I’m asking for your indulgence here. My goal is to maintain my testimony to the five-minute limit prescribed by the rules; ideally I’ll come in a little bit shorter but no less forthright.

A few weeks ago, Maryland Republicans put out their version of a Congressional redistricting map. It appealed to me not because of the prospect of placing several Democrats currently serving in Congress together in a single district; in principle a few minor tweaks could eliminate that issue.

Instead, the beauty of this map is that it leaves most counties within one Congressional district. No longer is Anne Arundel County divided among four different Congressmen without a resident representative among them, nor is there the prospect of again having some of what are considered the most gerrymandered Congressional districts in the country to place Maryland into a sort of political hall of shame. No, on the Republican map neighbors are left with neighbors and districts were drawn in a manner which makes relative geographical sense.

Unfortunately, what we will likely get is a package which reflects the Democrats’ goal of electing a Congressional delegation where all members come from their party, achieved by splitting Republican strongholds up as much as possible. Liberal Democrats have dreamed up maps which place Eastern Shore watermen in the same district as the toughest minority neighborhoods in urban Baltimore city and coal miners living along the West Virginia border with District of Columbia suburbanites, all in the name of something called the 10-0 Project. Needless to say, if you place these combinations together I don’t see a cohesive set of interests there.

While I’m certain the Republican plan won’t get a lot of traction from a group selected by a governor trying to work his way up in prominence among national Democrats for a future political run, let’s at least strive to be a little more sensitive to the interests of not breaking up counties and neighborhoods into multiple Congressional districts.

Now I’ll speak on the state level.

It so happens that I serve locally on the Republican Central Committee, and as such I was elected based on a vote by every Republican in Wicomico County. However, I realize that the old method of having State Senators elected from each county regardless of population went away a few decades back, to be replaced with the population-based system we have now.

Yet when I moved here there was one piece of the political puzzle which made no sense whatsoever to me – I have two different representatives in the House of Delegates from one district. Upon further investigation, I was flabbergasted to find that others in my same region have just one Delegate they could call their own while still others across the state had three different Delegates – in most cases, these areas elected all three from one political party while those areas where the minority party tended to hold sway had their districts broken up into two or three subdistricts. I was used to the system in my native state of Ohio where each of their 33 State Senate districts are broken down into thirds to create 99 separate House districts.

While the numbers are different, that is the system Maryland should strive to emulate – each Senate district should be broken up into three different House districts. That way rural counties would have more of an opportunity to get a resident Delegate, something which several counties on the Eastern Shore have lacked from time to time because of the current system.

Moreover, those who create the district maps should begin at the county level and attempt to minimize division. Here in Wicomico County we are a poster child for that phenomenon – while we potentially could elect six Delegates and two State Senators from our county, it’s just as likely we could have none. Imagine a county of nearly 100,000 people without a voice in the state legislature! While I’m aware that parts of our large county would have to be shaved off to maintain an equal population balance among districts, this county could easily at least have one House of Delegates district formed entirely within its borders.

I want to thank the Redistricting Advisory Committee for holding this hearing. Unfortunately, there are many of us who sincerely feel that the die has already been cast and the state is just going through the motions of having hearings so they can say they heard the public when another partisan map that tears apart communities in the name of political power is revealed.

Hopefully you’ll all surprise me and put out something which makes sense geographically and enrages political insiders from both parties because they’ll have to work for re-election instead of believing they’ll be a Delegate or Senator for life.

Once again, I thank you and hope you’ll take my constructive criticism into account when the decisions are made.

Update: I’ll have a report on the proceedings for Monday, as tomorrow I have a 9/11 piece that will be up most of the day.

Harris: Obama job plan ‘stimulus II’

After Congressman Andy Harris heard President Obama’s new proposal for that “one thing – jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs,” as Teamster head James Hoffa would say, his reaction was short, sweet, and direct:

Over Labor Day weekend I met with many small business owners on the Ocean City Boardwalk – a common theme I heard from those potential job creators was their desire to get government out of the way so that they could do what they do best: grow their businesses and create American jobs.  President Obama’s newest spending plan is nothing more than a second Stimulus bill.  Just like the first Stimulus passed by the previous Congress, it will not create jobs, but instead delay recovery, increase the debt and grow the size of government.  I believe that common sense ideas like a balanced budget amendment, elimination of job-destroying regulations and making America energy independent will create American jobs and get us out of this recession.

Well, he’s right, isn’t he? More after the jump.

Continue reading “Harris: Obama job plan ‘stimulus II’”

Shorebird of the Year – a 2011 season wrapup

Ooooooooh, did it get ugly at the end.

You know, when the Shorebirds began the season 16-9 I figured we’d have at least one half of playoff contention. But the Orioles minor league geniuses decided to promote most of our best players to Frederick, allowing them to have a playoff squad and, well, as you can see by a 55-85 final record we got the crumbs. It was even worse than last year’s 59-81 mark, which we managed in much the same fashion: a poor second half.

At one point, we had a reasonably good offensive team, but in the end the batting was offensive.

  • Our overall team average was dead last in the league at .242, a full six points behind the next-worst team.
  • We scored 582 runs, which was 12th of 14. Bear in mind that the two teams behind us played one and three fewer games, respectively.
  • We had just 217 doubles – again, last in the league by 12.
  • We also had just 20 triples, which trailed the 13th place team by one.
  • Our 60 home runs were – surprise! – last in the league. The next worst team had 63.
  • One bright spot was drawing 500 walks, third best in the loop.
  • Our 1,051 strikeouts were sixth most in the SAL.
  • We stole 108 bases, good for 11th place.
  • Given the poor power numbers it’s no shock that our OPS (on-base percentage plus slugging percentage) was dead last at .659 – next worst was a .682 mark.

It goes without saying our offense was one of the most punchless in memory – remember, when the season started we had Kipp Schutz (who hit .381 with Delmarva,) Jonathan Schoop (.316) and Manny Machado (who was hitting .333 before injuring his knee) to anchor the lineup. By the end of August, the team as a whole barely exceeded the Mendoza line for the month.

Likewise, the pitching was in shambles too. Our 4.74 team ERA was second-to-last in the loop, topping only Asheville (which plays in a hitter’s park.)

  • Our five shutouts tied us for 12th place.
  • We tied for fourth-best with 38 saves.
  • We allowed the second most hits with 1,318 (Asheville allowed the most.)
  • It follows that we tied for second with Rome in allowing the most runs, 760 (Asheville gave up the most.) We had second all to ourselves with 648 earned runs, though.
  • We were 7th out of 14 in allowing 106 home runs.
  • Allowing 516 walks was fourth most in the league.
  • On the flip side, striking out 988 batters was second-fewest (Augusta fanned 962 as a staff.)
  • Leading only Asheville, our 1.49 WHIP (walks + hits/innings pitched) was 13th.

On top of all that, our fielding percentage ranked just 10th of 14 teams and we committed the third-most errors. Add it all up and it’s not hard to see why we finished 30 games under break-even.

So will we get any help next year? It’s not too likely since Aberdeen finished at the bottom of the New York-Penn League with a 24-51 record. But the Gulf Coast League rookie affiliate won its division with a 38-22 record, which may help us for later in 2012 or even 2013 – they had exceptionally good pitching.

On the other hand, the aforementioned Frederick Keys made the playoffs with a league-best 80-59 record and AA Bowie just missed their playoffs with a 75-66 record. (Norfolk was like us, resting among the International League bottom feeders with a 56-87 mark.)

But the other purpose of this post is to provide the wrap on how the 22 players who were selected as Shorebird of the Week fared for the year and pick a Shorebird of the Year. We start way back on Opening Day in April.

April 7: Brian Conley

Brian, we hardly knew ya. After playing just four games for Delmarva this year and hitting .250 on 2-for-8 and 6 walks, the 2010 Shorebird of the Year was promoted to Frederick. Sadly, he played just 7 games for the Keys, going 2-for-15 (.133) before being released by the Orioles in late April. I couldn’t find any indication Brian tried the independent league route later in the summer, so it’s likely he’s called it a career.

April 14: Manny Machado

Most of the preseason buzz about the Shorebirds centered on the fact Machado was making his full-season debut here. Over the first month of the season Machado lived up to it, but an early May knee injury sidelined Manny for a month and robbed local fans of a number of chances to watch the Orioles’ newest sensation. After Manny hit .276/6/24/.859 OPS in 38 games with Delmarva (one of those six home runs being a memorable monster shot over the Arthur W. Perdue Stadium scoreboard) he was promoted to Frederick for the second half and hit .245/5/26/.692 with the Keys in 63 games – not exactly world-beating numbers but that and his prospect status are probably good enough to allow him to be on the cusp next spring of a promotion to Bowie.

Other honors: Manny was SAL Player of the Week on May 2, an SAL All-Star, and played in the Futures Game.

April 21: Jonathan Schoop

Lost in the preseason hype over Machado was another talented young player who outperformed Manny while he was here. Before being promoted in early June, Schoop was putting up a solid .316/8/34/.890 line in 51 games and he continued to outdo Machado with Frederick, hitting .271/5/37/.704 with the Keys in 77 contests. (It’s also worthy to note that in just 51 games Schoop ended up being our team home run leader with those 8.) I think he’s just as capable of having a sound major league career as Machado, so I’m selecting Jonathan as my Prospect of the Year. Like Manny, he could start in Frederick but I wouldn’t be shocked at all if Schoop’s in Bowie’s opening day lineup.

Other honors: Jonathan also played in the Futures Game and was Carolina League Player of the Week August 15.

April 28: David Walters

The first pitcher I selected, David also had the distinction of playing the entire season here. At first glance, his numbers weren’t much to write home about (1-6 record, 3.93 ERA, 35 strikeouts vs. 12 walks in 50 1/3 innings) except for that 30 saves, which led the South Atlantic League. One concern was that he allowed 62 hits, giving him a rather high 1.47 WHIP. Still, he succeeded more often than not in nailing down the save and was thus involved in over half of our 55 wins. He’s probably on track to take the job to the next level.

Other honors: David was an SAL All-Star.

May 5: Scott Copeland

It was a tale of two seasons for Scott. He actually struggled with Delmarva, making 20 starts and compiling a 5-9 record with a lofty 6.58 ERA, fanning 55, walking 46, and allowing 136 hits in 108 innings. But given the opportunity at Frederick Scott seized it, making his last 6 starts there after an early August promotion, going 3-2, 2.14 in 33 2/3 innings and giving up just 25 hits. It balanced out his overall numbers and most likely makes Scott an early candidate for continuing in his role with the Keys next season.

May 12: Kipp Schutz

Kipp’s departure shortly after his SotW selection began the exodus of the heart of Delmarva’s batting lineup. In 38 games here, Schutz achieved the gaudy batting line of .381/4/36/.997, leading many to ask where the heck did this guy come from? Unfortunately, his season turned around in Frederick and not in the way one would want – Kipp hit just .212/7/36/.612 with the Keys in 87 games there. My best guess is that he’ll repeat at Frederick next season since he doesn’t have a lot to prove at this level.

May 19: Ty Kelly

In his second season with Delmarva, Ty had a better overall stint and eventually led the team in a number of offensive categories. Kelly paced the team in at-bats, runs, hits, and total bases, also being near the top in several other hitting areas. As a whole, his .274/4/46/.697 line is rather good, particularly when you note he walked 67 times and struck out only 63. But he did lose a lot in the power categories of doubles and triples, going from 40 extra-base hits in 2010 to just 17 this year – an alarming and precipitous drop for just 15 extra batting average points. Having repeated at the same level this season and played a relatively identical amount overall, that could portend a player who’s reached his ceiling.

Other honors: Kelly was named an SAL All-Star and selected by both Mountaire and the Shorebirds Fan Club as their Player of the Year.

May 26: Mike Flacco

Mike extended a solid finish to the 2010 season with Delmarva through the first 2/3 or so of the 2011 season before finally being promoted to Frederick in mid-July. With the Shorebirds Flacco hit .273/5/41/.790 and led the team in doubles with 20 despite only playing 72 games – or about a half-season – here. His Frederick numbers weren’t shameful either as he batted .250/5/22/.773 in 50 contests there. That’s probably enough to keep him playing there in 2012 as Mike slowly advances up the Orioles’ system.

Other honors: Mike was the SAL Player of the Week May 23.

June 2: Jacob Pettit

Like Scott Copeland, Jacob took full advantage of a promotion to vastly improve his numbers; however, on the surface Pettit was more deserving than Copeland. Jacob worked to a 5-4 record and 4.42 ERA in 15 starts here, with a 1.47 WHIP in 93 2/3 innings based on 108 hits and 30 walks (with 65 strikeouts.) Yet Pettit was unbeaten in 10 Frederick starts, compiling a 7-0 record and sparkling 1.62 ERA. The difference? Allowing nearly one fewer runner per two innings, with a Frederick WHIP of 1.02. It’s not outside the realm of thought that an exceptional spring couldn’t get him to Bowie, but my guess is that he begins 2012 in Frederick to begin another playoff run.

Other honors: Pettit was selected to the SAL All-Star Game.

June 9: Michael Ohlman

The primary backstop for the Shorebirds, Ohlman began the season well at the plate before fading down the stretch. Still, he ended up with a .224/4/51/.627 mark and led the team in RBI – a much better second act than a 2010 season where he began here but was demoted to Bluefield after hitting just .174 in 34 games. Given the dearth of pure hitting catchers in the Orioles system, Michael could make a move up to Frederick for 2012 but may be kept here to get another year of experience first.

Other honors: Michael was picked as the fifth representative to the All-Star Game.

June 16: Mikey Planeta

Mikey spent his second full season with the Shorebirds this year, although he joined the team a little late thanks to an injury. Once he arrived in May, Mikey started out well but tailed off to a .220/2/23/.536 mark in 102 games. Unfortunately, those numbers are pretty close to his full 2010 season marks of .226/0/33/.545 in 117 games, so there wasn’t a lot of offensive progress made between the two seasons. With 29 assists over the last two seasons, though, the outfield arm may be what keeps Mikey in the system for a third tour with Delmarva.

June 23: Michael Rooney

Rooney was a player who went in the other direction this year, as he began in Frederick but got demoted to Delmarva for two months. Yet things worked out for him as he was back with the Keys at season’s end after a one-game detour to Bowie (where he went 0-for-2, striking out twice.) His 42 games at Delmarva were most successful, as he hit .253/0/9/.677 with the Shorebirds. Meanwhile, his two separate tours of duty with Frederick (40 games total) resulted in a .192/0/3/.496 line. But Michael filled a need with both squads as a versatile backup infielder, so he may well ride the shuttle between Delmarva and Frederick next season too.

June 30: Jarret Martin

There are two schools of thought when a pitcher leads the team in losses: either he’s not very talented or the manager has a lot of confidence in him to keep running the pitcher out there. Judging by the numbers and the fact Jarret was moved into the rotation in May, my guess is the latter. Martin was 5-12 with a 4.96 ERA this season, and while he allowed only 107 hits in 110 2/3 innings the primary concern going forward has to be his walk rate – Martin walked 65 batters, which increased his WHIP to a 1.55 mark. However, his free pass rate improved from season to season (from Bluefield in 2010) which signifies progress in that area and he led the Shorebirds with 97 strikeouts. I think Jarret is one of those guys on the cusp between staying here and moving up in 2012.

Other honors: Jarret was the SAL Pitcher of the Week June 23.

July 7: Cameron Roth

Spending the full season with the Shorebirds, Roth provided effective long relief for Delmarva. His numbers weren’t overly special (going 3-2 with a 5.05 ERA, 57 strikeouts, 33 walks, and a WHIP of 1.51 in 82 innings) but he transitioned well between being a starter at Bluefield and pitching in relief with us this year. Like Jarret Martin, Roth is a pitcher who could find himself either at Frederick or Delmarva next year.

Other honors: Roth was selected by Mountaire for their Community Service Award.

July 14: Tim Berry

Tim was the one constant in Delmarva’s starting rotation, making 26 starts over the season. Set with a strict limit of 5 innings per start thanks to recent arm surgery, Berry managed to pitch through the five innings in the majority of his outings. Overall, he threw 116 2/3 innings, allowing 107 hits and 61 walks for a WHIP of 1.44. He only had a 3-7 record but was a very effective starter. Obviously the question is whether the Orioles will allow him to be stretched out more next season and let him go deeper into games – he could be a formidable starter if he’s retained here at Delmarva.

July 21: Brenden Webb

Brenden wasn’t one of the offensive stars of the team, hitting just .218/4/29/.632 in 400 at-bats. He led the team by playing in 121 games and had 16 outfield assists. He was the top Shorebird with 75 walks, but also had the most strikeouts (by far) with 152. In other words, nearly half of his 487 plate appearances ended in either a strikeout or walk. This may mean Webb is back here next year honing his pitch selection while trying to maintain his discerning batting eye.

July 28: Garabez Rosa

Another player demoted from Frederick at the season’s midpoint, Rosa came relatively close to the numbers he had in a full season here in 2010 (.262/3/32/.647 in 2011 vs. .251/5/44/.632 in 2010.) But the .212 start he had in 53 games with Frederick meant a return to Delmarva was likely, and he was the one moved aside for the progress of Manny Machado. There’s no doubt Rosa could return to the Keys next year and try to improve on his 2011 numbers, and that seems like the most likely course of action.

August 4: Joe Oliviera

Pinched for playing time in Frederick, where he gathered just 26 at-bats in a month’s time (hitting .308, though,) Joe was sent down for the second half and responded quite well. In 39 games Joe hit .252/2/20/.677, making him the best-hitting catcher on the roster. Because of that and a difference in age between him and fellow backstop Michael Ohlman he may be the one moved up to Frederick to begin 2012.

August 11: Jeremy Nowak

After spending a week with the Aberdeen IronBirds (a team he played for in 2010) Jeremy was promoted to Delmarva based on a .286 mark in 8 games (he hit just .179 there last year.) Nowak started out well here but faded down the stretch to a .234/3/21/.684 finish. Yet his promise seems to be in a gap-to-gap power hitter since he had 20 extra base hits out of 52 total. I could see him beginning next year here with a number 3, 4, or 5 spot in the batting order with his name on it because he’s a decent contact hitter with a little bit of speed (10 stolen bases in 62 games here.)

August 18: Matt Bywater

The first SotW to make his debut in 2011, Matt pitched 15 1/3 innings in the Gulf Coast League (no record but an 0.59 ERA and 0.91 WHIP) before jumping to Delmarva in late July. Yes, Matt is a little wild (32 walks in 45 1/3 innings) but he also has the sort of stuff which allowed him to strike out 68 batters in just over 60 total innings this season. His WHIP of 1.54 is pretty good considering his walk rate, and that tended to vary by start – when Matt was on he could be dominant and three times the bullpen lost his chance for that elusive first professional win. My bet would be that Matt gets that win early in 2012 as a member of the Shorebirds’ staff – since he was drafted in 2010 but didn’t debut until this season the Orioles may push him to a full-season team to start 2012, or perhaps hold him back for a few chilly April weeks. In either case, I think Bywater is ticketed here.

August 25: David Baker

To put it bluntly, had David been here all season we may have had a much better record. After 5 starts at Aberdeen (1-2, 2.45 with an 0.97 WHIP and 23/8 strikeout/walk ratio in 25 2/3 innings) it was clear Baker had earned a shot at the next level. He did well here, going 3-4 in nine starts. (From July 14 onward, that 3 wins tied him for the team lead with Luis Noel, who was pitching in relief at that point.) Baker had a 2.82 ERA for us, allowed only 40 hits in 54 1/3 innings, struck out 48 while walking just 19, and compiled a tidy 1.08 WHIP. To me, I think he deserves a chance at Frederick to begin next year as his first full-season team.

September 1: John Ruettiger

“Rudy” parlayed a 3-game, 6-for-13 stint in the Gulf Coast League into an assignment to Delmarva and became the first 2011 draftee to be selected as Shorebird of the Week. All told, for Delmarva John went 21-for-77 (.273) in 19 games, without a home run but knocking in 3. Generally he was the leadoff hitter but he only stole 1 base here, being caught 3 times. With just 90 professional at-bats, John will likely start here next season as he was an 8th round draft pick and the Orioles tend to move highly-drafted college players quickly. Don’t be surprised if he’s not moved along with a decent start to 2012.

I had a very difficult time picking a Shorebird of the Year because a number of players who excelled at this level didn’t stay long enough to really be considered part of the team. If early season SotW picks like Manny Machado, Jonathan Schoop, Kipp Schutz or a guy who I didn’t get a chance to select like Trent Mummey had stuck around into August and maintained their level of play this would be a no-brainer. The same goes for late-season arrival David Baker.

But I have to pick someone who played well and spent a significant amount of time here, and that trimmed the field to just two players: one pitcher and one position player.

To me, the top pitcher was David Walters. He didn’t have overpowering statistics, but one has to factor in that he saved 30 out of 55 victories. That’s 54.5% of our wins, and if you look at all-time save leaders for a single season they generally saved about 60 percent of a team’s wins – Walters isn’t all that far off and he was entrusted with a lot of leads.

On the other hand, the top position player was Ty Kelly. He was among the leaders in a number of offensive categories, and that’s what led him to get his player of the year honors from Mountaire and the Shorebirds Fan Club. (I voted for him in that balloting.)

But then I thought about expectations. On the one hand, Kelly is in his second year here and as I noted he regressed in some key areas. He was the real-life survivor of a number of player moves involving the names I mentioned above, meaning he’s not as highly regarded as those prospects. Kelly was a 19th round pick in 2009, so he was figured to have somewhat of an opportunity for advancement. Still, all told he had a pretty good year.

Yet David Walters was drafted – just not by the Orioles. Atlanta drafted him in the 47th round of the 2008 draft but Walters chose to return to school and was rewarded by not being picked in 2009. The Orioles signed a hometown product off the street that summer, so in essence Walters has been playing three seasons on an extended tryout. He’s found a role and seized it.

So it’s a tough call. I toyed for quite some time with the idea of having co-Shorebirds of the Year, but these intangibles finally led me to make a decision – you could say I changed my mind. Meet your 2011 Shorebird of the Year:

The 2011 Shorebird of the Year, David Walters.

Because he was usually placed in a situation where the game was on the line and did so well at it he led the league in saves (by a wide margin, I may add) I decided that David Walters is a worthy 2011 Shorebird of the Year.

I hope everyone involved with the Shorebirds organization (an award-winning one, by the way) has a great offseason. I’m already pining for 2012 to begin because we have some payback for the last two seasons to return.

And if I could give an award for best feature coverage, Ben Hill would get it for this article. I remember seeing him last Saturday night at the game doing the first pitch and being the Rally Banana. His tour saved the best for last, I guess.

Dossier: Rick Santorum

Political resume: Santorum was elected to the House of Representatives in Pennsylvania’s 18th District in 1990, serving two terms before moving up to the U.S. Senate in 1994. He won re-election in 2000 but lost badly in 2006. According to RealClearPolitics.com Rick averages 2.6% in recent polls, placing him eighth out of nine. However, his support has increased in recent weeks.

On campaign finance/election reform (three points): He made mostly correct votes on this subject while in the Senate, and has a long enough body of work that I’m comfortable giving him two points.

On property rights (five points): Back in 2005 Rick termed the Kelo decision as “undermining people’s fundamental rights to property.” I think he gets it, so I’ll give him the five points.

On the Second Amendment (seven points): With perhaps one or two exceptions, he has a good gun record so I’ll give him six points.

On education (eight points): He may be coming around to sell himself to conservatives, but Rick’s recent call to eliminate the Department of Education comes on the heels of a voting record too enamored with federal control. He only gets two points for his efforts.

On the Long War/veterans affairs (nine points): While it’s not very detailed in scope, his policy page and this statement would lead me to believe he’d make the right decisions on the Long War. I grant him seven points.

On immigration (eleven points): He ignores the issue on his website, but his impassioned plea against amnesty in 2006 should count for something. I’ll count it as five points.

On energy independence (twelve points): Rick sees energy independence as a job creation issue. But he favors the “all of the above” approach generally held by Republicans and correctly states we should “put aside our dreams of ‘green jobs.’” The voting record isn’t bad, although I do object to one vote in particular. So I’ll grant him seven points.

On entitlements (thirteen points): His vision of entitlements is to “reform” and not eliminate. He’s absolutely right when he says the entitlement ‘addiction’ is bad for the country, but doesn’t go far enough to end it. We need more like cold turkey for the younger generation – including myself. He gets seven points.

On trade and job creation (fourteen points): Rick has come up with a common sense plan to get America’s economy moving again, with an emphasis on manufacturing. But there’s a fly in the ointment given Santorum isn’t always a free trade advocate. Still, he has some good concepts and they’re worth about eleven points.

On the role of government (fifteen points): If you look at what he states and the record, one could conclude Rick is in favor of low taxes. But those lower rates assume an extension of the current system, and the fact he sought to tinker with the code to promote a certain behavior makes me wonder how serious he would be about truly reforming the system as a whole. It’s a problem I haven’t seen him reconcile to my satisfaction, so I’m only giving him five points here.

Intangibles (up to three points): Rick covers the social conservative bases of being pro-life and for marriage between a man and a woman. But he takes the marriage aspect to the extent of wanting a Constitutional amendment, and I think that goes too far. He’s also been a flip-flopper on ethanol subsidies, which is a non-starter with me. Yet he also supports Israel, so he’s pretty much a wash in this category.

Continue reading “Dossier: Rick Santorum”

Dossier: Jon Huntsman

Political resume: Huntsman has worked with presidents from Reagan to Obama (except for Bill Clinton,) most notably as Ambassador to Singapore from 1992-93 and to China from 2009-11. In between, Jon was elected as Governor of Utah in 2004 and won re-election in 2008. He served until accepting the China post in August, 2009. He formally entered the race on June 21, about two months after resigning as Ambassador to China.

Poll standing: According to RealClearPolitics.com Huntsman currently polls ninth in the race (eighth among declared candidates) at 1.3 percent. He’s the lowest among candidates who qualify for listing by polling one percent or more.

On campaign finance/election reform (three points): Huntsman signed a decent voter-ID law as governor of Utah, so that’s a step in the right direction. But he also signed a bill allowing online voter registration, which wiped out some of that goodwill. Some things are too important to do online. So he gets just one point.

On property rights (five points): He was ahead of the curve on Kelo and advocated for American companies regarding intellectual property rights while Ambassador to China. My only knock is whether he was leading or following in his capacity, so I’ll give him four points.

On the Second Amendment (seven points): As governor of Utah, Jon had a good Second Amendment record, like this pair of bills. He gets all seven points.

On education (eight points): Huntsman has a mixed record on education, supporting school vouchers but not advocating for less federal involvement otherwise. I’m not convinced he’d be a leader on this issue so I’m giving him only two points.

On the Long War/veterans affairs (nine points): I’m not quite sure where Jon wants to go in the Long War or with national security in general. One problem is that he wants to cut Afghan troops faster than even Obama would. But he’s correct on Libya so I’ll grant him two points.

On immigration (eleven points): Normally I’m a pretty good state’s rights guy, but should we push border security onto the states as he advocates? The problem with that is California’s version of a “secure” border may not be as tight as Arizona’s. Nor does he address what to do with the illegals who are here; perhaps because he supports the DREAM Act. I’m deducting three points.

On energy independence (twelve points): “Until we put a value on carbon, we’re never going to be able to get serious with dealing with climate change longer term.” Uh, no. First of all, mankind has little to do with climate change and second of all carbon credits are just a scam for wealth redistribution. If you really believe this – and past history suggests you do – then you’re not the man for the job. I’m taking off all 12 points.

On entitlements (thirteen points): Huntsman hints at the idea of using states as laboratories, calls Obamacare ‘top-heavy,’ and likes the Ryan Medicare plan. But I’m troubled that he’s ‘comfortable‘ with a mandate. I’m not sure where he stands on other entitlements, though, so I can only give him five points.

On trade and job creation (fourteen points): One of the strongest areas of Huntsman’s resume is his stance on these two issues. He’s a free trader, which is a plus. But the cautionary note I have to draw is that he may be assuming those things which led to job creation success in Utah would translate to a national scale – some may, and some may not. While I applaud the emphasis on creating the proper business environment, perhaps I’d like more detail. I’ll give him eleven points here.

On taxation and the role of government (fifteen points): Huntsman scores some points by wanting a fairer, flatter taxation system with fewer deductions – but doesn’t go as far as true of a flat tax as he instituted in Utah. And while, as I noted in the point above that what happens in a state may not translate to a national level, the fact that spending surged while he was governor makes me wonder how serious of a budget cutter he would be, particularly if he listens to the siren song of the greenies. I’ll give him six points strictly based on the tax ideas.

Intangibles (up to three points): On the plus side, Huntsman doesn’t believe in ethanol subsidies and purports to be pro-life. There’s no negatives I haven’t already covered, so he nets an additional two points.

Continue reading “Dossier: Jon Huntsman”