RIP Bo, Hype, and Bad Press

Bo Schembechler died yesterday. Here’s an obituary written by Mitch Albom. I cannot improve upon Albom; I won’t even try.

RIP, Bo.

I’ve never seen anything like it, ever. ESPN’s web site is pretty much ALL Michigan – Ohio State…at least on the home page. Including that ridiculous countdown clock—Countdown to Judgment Day!—which I saw for the first time night before last but forgot to include in yesterday’s Miscellaneous Moans post. I should have. Now my memory certainly ain’t what it used to be, but I cannot remember another game that has been hyped as much as this one. Well...perhaps last year’s USC – Texas national championship game got as much (or more) hype; that game was another Number One vs. Number Two match-up, but with higher stakes. But like last year’s Rose Bowl, there’s not a chance in Hell we’ll be disappointed in today’s actual game.

There isn’t a football fan in America that doesn’t know about this rivalry. If you’re not a football fan, it would still be fun to read “Game, rivalry couldn’t be scripted any better,” just for the “fun facts” about Michigan – OSU. Here are two:

It is true that in 1950, the teams played through a blizzard with 29 inches of snow and more than 50,000 fans sat through it. Michigan's Chuck Ortmann punted 24 times, and the Wolverines won 9-3, despite failing to make a first down. Buckeyes coach Wes Fesler quit a few days later. Ohio State hired the little-known Hayes away from Miami (Ohio).

It is true that in 1970, a local judge in Columbus dismissed a charge of obscenity against a defendant arrested for wearing a T-shirt that said, "F--- Michigan" because the message "accurately expressed" local feelings about the university and the state.

OSU is a seven-point favorite in today’s game. I don’t care. I think Michigan can win it, and my heart is with them. I heard on ESPN that there are signs all over Ann Arbor that say “Win one for Bo.” That may be a little bit over the top and a lot maudlin, but I can understand the sentiment. My heart is with Michigan: Go BLUE!

This is just too, too rich: The usual suspects start their whining about how biased the media are against the Democrats! Just a sample:

It's as if all these unpleasant events of the last six years never happened and we are back in the days of endless cable bitch-fests filled with sniggering about unauthorized blow jobs and earth tones and "grown-ups" who eat PB&J's and travel with their favorite pillies.

I knew it would happen in one form or another. (We caught a glimpse of it with the John Kerry apology treatment.) The DC press corps hates having to criticize Republicans. Republicans make them feel all icky and call them liberals (which they so, like, aren't!) I confess, however, that I'm a little bit awed by how smoothly they have transitioned back into their assigned roles. I thought there might be a moment or two of cognitive dissonance as they went from grim and serious reports about terrorism and war to shallow personality politics and tabloid character assassination. I assumed they would at least wait until the presidential campaign took off to contrast the manly Republican Alpha with the loser Omega Dem, but I guess I didn't realize how much they've missed their fast times at DC High.

Well, perception is reality, ain’t it? Personally, I think these guys took too many drugs in the way-back, or perhaps it’s a classic case of selective memory. Coz, if I recall correctly, the MSM (fittingly, as it turns out) bombarded us with predictions of a Democrat landslide during the past month or so, punctuated with hourly calls for Rumsfeld’s resignation and supported by testimonials from every retired Army general whose ox had been gored by transformation. Not to mention the MSM gloating about Dubya’s declining popularity each and every time the poll-du-jour was released. Or perhaps we’re just watching and/or reading different media?

And then there’s this:

"For Incoming Democrats, Populism Trumps Ideology," headlined The New York Times in a front-pager a few days ago: "New Class Promises End to Partisan Tone."

The following headlines appeared in USA Today over several recent days: "Democrats offer to help steer new course in Iraq; some leaders vow to probe 'mistakes'" ... "Republicans lose ground among Hispanic voters; Democrats perceived as being on 'right side' of immigration issue" ... "Democrats: Identify pork sponsors; Pelosi plans to target anonymous 'earmarks' " ... "Public expects the Dems to deliver; 61% prefer party, not Bush, to chart course."

Doesn’t sound like the press is indulging in Dem-bashing, does it? In fact, the author, William Powers, maintains the press (and I’d make an argument by extension, all media) simply loves the Democrats, but it is and it’s gonna be, tough-love:

Tough love. Journalists are more aggressive under Democratic rule. This doesn't jibe with the stereotype of reporters as liberals, but it's the stereotype that winds up undermining itself. When Democrats are in power, there's a huge incentive for reporters not to appear too sympathetic and thereby confirm the old liberal-bias charge. Thus, despite the friendly coverage we're seeing in this honeymoon period, the Democratic restoration will eventually produce tougher coverage than we saw of the GOP Congress, as media outlets strive to prove that they aren't soft on the Democrats.

So maybe the usual suspects have a point. Personally, I don’t think so. We’ll see.

Today’s Pic: The trees have shed their leaves. We’ll see sunsets like this from now until sometime in mid-April. Winter… December, 2004.