Well, I was wrong. I admit it.

And some people probably think that I can't admit being wrong for anything. LOL!

 

Re: my rant about NASCAR's cap on teams---

 

I just found out that they're going to 'grandfather' both Rousch and Hendrick's team ownership into the mix, giving them some time to comply. So the worry I had about one of the teams being worried about being cut doesn't factor into things.

 

This is a good thing. As I said, I can understand how this will help the sport in the long run. The smaller teams can't get good drivers because the bigger ones with multiple teams snag them up to fill their cars.

 

I'm still not sure about the testing thing, though. They impound the cars after qualifying, yet they can't test beforehand to find out what they might need to do to make the car run right during the race.

 

Before long, we're going to see 'cookie-cutter' cars, similar to the IROC race series uses. Yes, that makes it more driver than crew being more important. But I have problems with the direction this sport is taking.

On the track

I'm a NASCAR fan. Ask anyone. They'll tell you that I watch every NASCAR race that comes on, Cup, Busch or Truck series. And most of my friends and family know better than to call me during those times.

 

This little rant is aimed at the big bosses of NASCAR, France and Helton.

 

I've always believed that watching racing is a Southern thing. Like going into a restaurant and asking for a "Coke", and not being surprised when I get a Pepsi instead of Coca Cola. It's nearly an inbred response for us to like cars that go fast in a circle (I prefer the ovals and triovals over the 'road courses'. So sue me. I'm a purist. But I still watch them anyway).

 

So when Msrs. France and Helton start messing with my NASCAR, I get upset. They've made a lot of stupid decisions (at least, they're stupid in my not so humble opinion). Impounding cars between qualifying and racing. Severely limiting testing on circuit tracks (how are these people supposed to know how to set up a car if they can't test how it reacts to a track? By Ouija board? I Ching? Shooting dice? Come to think of it, that's what they're doing now in the impound races, more or less). No racing back to the caution. Stopping *all* on-track retaliation and fining drivers on a sliding scale for breaking one of their many 'rules'.

 

But their latest bit - limiting the number of cars that can be put on the track by any given team - is really getting my goat.  Okay, I can understand *why* they're doing it - I can't understand the *timing* of the announcement. Jack Rousch has five cars in the Chase. Half the field. With the announcement of the team cap, one of those teams knows that they won't be around next year. Their focus is no longer just on winning the championship. Their focus is now on keeping their jobs. Would it have hurt NASCAR's bigwigs to wait two weeks, until after the Cup Championship has been decided to make this announcement?

 

I have to agree with Mr. Rousch: this seems like a deliberate slap in the face to him from NASCAR.  They're trying to penalize him for having a successful shop and getting five teams into the Chase. Half the field.

Both Rousch and Hendrick shops will have to cut a team for next year's races. Yes, that will free up a couple of drivers and teams, but at what cost to the sport?

 

I sometimes think that Mr. France doesn't care about the *sport* as much as he does the money it can bring in. He certainly doesn't care about the core fans, the fans who have been watching NASCAR races all their lives, who went to places like Rockingham to watch races, and who now can't do that since the Cup series doesn't race at the "Rock" anymore.

 

I hope Mr. France realizes that you can't alienate your core fanbase and hope to keep things working. NASCAR was born in the South, and by turning away from the roots of the sport, you lose a great deal.

 

Never forget *where* you came from.

 

End today's rant.

 

Disclaimer: As always, the above is *my* opinion. Yours may and probably does vary.

Gratitude - or the lack thereof

Okay, I'm tired and I'm not going to take it anymore.

Where have I heard that? Oh, yeah. "Network". Wonderful movie. Everyone should watch it at least once.

 

The protests-turned-riots in Venezuela today made me sick. I've noticed that when it comes to taking our money, countries are only too eager to hold out their hand over and over again, expecting the US to bail them out of whatever problem they've gotten into, whether it be a tsunami or typhoon or earthquake - but they seem to believe that means they can tell us what to do.

 

Funny, seems to me that it should be the other way 'round. Not that I'm advocating the US telling anyone how to run their country in return for money - but I'm just tired of people begging us for help, and then slapping our face the first moment they have a chance. Then they still expect us to be there whenever there's trouble.

 

Maybe what we need to do is start saying "no" to some of these countries when they come begging. Remind them about the protests in which their citizens burned our flag and our leaders in effigy. Remove our soldiers from their land if there are any there and put them somewhere that they will be welcomed.

 

Let them see how quickly other countries take advantage of their absence. Let them find someone else's pockets to pick while they are stabbing them in the back.

 

I know it sounds harsh - and I know that the UN would scream at the idea of leaving some third world country to their own devices when a disaster strikes. "But you simply must help them!" the UN will cry. "You have a responsibility to the world!"

 

Fine. So we do. But what about their responsibility to us? They take our money and then spit on us. They take our money and then cry because we do something that upsets them.  They take our money --- I think you get the idea.

The US has never put strings on helping other countries during times of crisis. Too bad other countries put strings on the US that only go one way.

 

No, the US isn't perfect. We have corrupt politicians, and a two party system that refuses to allow any new ideas or people to upset the apple-cart for fear of losing power. But until something better comes along, I choose to believe that we have the best system in the world. It's better than some places, where you don't really have a choice about who to vote for. There might be ten people running, but the outcome is pre-ordained before the first vote is ever cast. Here, while there might not be a pound of real difference between to candidates, you don't know who is going to win until the last vote is counted.

 

We're free to speak out against those with whom we disagree. Free to stage peaceful protests about something that we don't like. We're free to try to change things if we think they need to be changed.

 

And we're free to help our fellow beings and expect nothing in return - except that they remember who it was that sent the help before staging a violent protest and attacking the source of that help.

 

Disagreeing with American policy isn't wrong. But the way one goes about it can be.

 

Whatever happened to old fashioned gratitude? Has it vanished just like so many other things? Among them common sense and self responsibility?

 

We'll see what happens tomorrow.