For lack of a better nickname, I pronounce the 2009-10 Kentucky men's basketball team "The Gritty Kitty Cats."
In the spirit of the Wildcat squad remembered as "The Fabulous Five" back in 1948-49, all the way up to "The Comeback Cats" of 1997-98, so too has the current UK team earned its moniker.
If the name doesn't make clear, this Kentucky team has been a "gritty" bunch, toughing out one close game after another. That too many games have been close when they might well have been blowouts, is indicative of a young inexperienced group of, well, "kitty cats."
Of course, in order to make this or another nickname endure, this team must fulfill its potential and win it all in Indianapolis on the first Monday in April. Otherwise, they'll be lumped in with "The Unbelievables." Can you even recall which team that was?
To be certain, no Wildcat starting five has ever featured such youth. But I'm not going with "Smitten Kittens." And I can't think of anything catchy to go with "Cubs." No offense, Chicago.
An older, wiser UK basketball historian would have to tell you of a Big Blue bunch that had so many close calls, yet managed to gut them out in the end. Still, I'm not buying "Cal's Closers" or "The Undeniables."
The Gritty Kitty Cats. Let it marinate. It'll grow on you, the way "The Fiddlin' Five" and "Rupp's Runts" did. Or just reduce it to a soundbite for texting and tweeting purposes - "The Kit-Cats."
The Kentucky State Senate voted this week to allow independent voters to participate in the Commonwealth's previously closed primary elections. The measure was split along party lines, with the Republican majority voting in favor.
The bill moves now to the House, where it will likely lose in the hands of a Democratic majority. It seems GOP legislators believe their party would benefit from an influx of independent voters, while Democrats believe quite the contrary.
One can only feel empathy for those who choose not to register with a particular party, and thus have no say in primary races. But, just as political parties nominate their own candidates for President at conventions, so too do the election laws of Kentucky try to keep the nomination process within the various parties themselves.
Elsewhere, primaries are wide open to all parties and voters. Then the top two vote-getters move on to the general election. Actually, in non-partisan local races here in Kentucky, a similar format is enacted.
But, for state and federal races, which are indeed partisan, a Kentucky voter must be registered with a political party in order to participate in its primary election. At least for now. And likely for the foreseeable future.
Of course, voters are welcome to vote for whomever they wish in November, regardless of party registration. Not good enough for some who prefer to remain "free agents" through primary season and choose candidates and parties race by race. No straight ticket voting for these independents.
The pro's of allowing independent voters in primaries are simply ensuring more of us participate in the glory of the democratic process. Many states allow for it, and somehow they manage to retain their claim to democracy.
The con's come when campaigns are initiated by rival parties and various special interests to falsely support a primary opponent they feel a better chance to defeat in a general election. It wasn't so long ago in Georgia when radio commentator Rush Limbaugh encouraged listeners to vote for a Democrat underdog in an open primary.
Needless to say, no such thing exists in Kentucky. So, if you hold sacred the tradition of closed primaries, the State Senate's bill is unwelcome. For those who enjoy a free-for-all in May, and have little regard for a political party's right to nominate its candidates, you need to get on the phone to your State Representative.
Yes, freedom must be maintained. In a recent election a couple years back I couldn't vote for my own father in the primaries because i'm independent. Our state congress is just trying to ensure that people have as little a "say-so" as possible. Anything they can do to create a new democracy, not concerned with the people of this country but with themselves.
With only 3 teams in last year's NCAA men's basketball tournament, the SEC was down. Way down. This season, as many as 7 Southeastern Conference teams have a legitimate chance to play in March Madness.
Then there's the Big East. Which just keeps on keepin' on - being the best college basketball conference in the country.
How good is a conference when a team from its bottom wins its fourth game in a row, its last 2 over ranked opponents? As of Wednesday night, so was the case with South Florida, who shocked No. 7 Georgetown in D.C.
There are no free passes in the Big East. Ask 3rd-ranked Syracuse, which trailed most of last Saturday's game at DePaul, before escaping by 2 points. Yeah, the Blue Demons team that didn't win a conference game last year, and has only one Big East win this season, fought the Orange down to the wire.
In the SEC, look no further than last season's best team from the conference, LSU, for a sure win. The Bayou Bengals have yet to beat an SEC opponent this season. And their visitor Saturday, Kentucky, likely won't help matters at the Maravich Assembly Center.
With 5 teams in this weeks' top 25 - an astonishing 4 in the first 7 - the Big East could have the first weekend of April all to itself. If the tourney bracket is configured appropriately, the "B'East" might even comprise the entire Elite Eight.
Bear in mind, two of last year's Big East stars, Louisville and Connecticut, may not even have the NCAA stage to shine come March. Both were #1 seeds in 2009, the Huskies advancing to the Final Four. No worries for this conference - it just reloads.
The SEC has only one legitimate Final Four contender in Kentucky, but some others may at least see action in the second weekend of the NCAA's. Still, this is a football conference first and foremost, and Wednesday's national signing day for recruits was proof. The SEC had 8 of the top 25 recruiting classes, including the best class overall signing with conference titan Florida.
The Big East is back, back to where it dominated in the 1980's. Some of you will recall the 1985 Final Four in Lexington, which featured 3 Big East teams, and an all-Big East Championship game. If there is a knock on this conference, it is that it lacks a dominant team to win it all. Its own parity may actually be its NCAA Title undoing.
But if a 3-6 Big East team like Connecticut can whip the top-ranked Texas Longhorns of the Big 12, than why wouldn't Villanova or West Virginia have their way with new #1 Kansas? The Jayhawks needed overtime Wednesday night to put away Colorado, a team which is now 11-11 on the season.
Should the Cards find their way into the dance, opponents should be dismayed to see them on the same card. Much the way the rigors of an SEC football season prepares all of its member teams for bowl season, any Big East basketball team will be better in March for having played in the best conference. U of L fans can take heart in this.
Kentucky fans can thus be grateful their Wildcats played and beat two Big East teams, Connecticut and Louisville, as another Big East team is likely to come between the Big Blue and a national championship. Cat faithful should hope for a NCAA draw that is light on Big East teams.
Winning more than three games against the Big East without a loss is highly unlikely. But if Kentucky finds itself facing a fourth Big East opponent this season, coach Calipari and his staff can use an unlikely model for clues to win - South Florida. Yeah, top to bottom, the Big East is that tough.
Who the hell made you a reporter?? The SEC has been and always will be better then ANYONE in the Big East. How many teams in the Big East can even come close to matching the records of Tournament apperances set by UK. I suppose if Looserville was still in the Metro or C-USA you would say they were the best conferance. Geez man, get another line of work.....GO BIG BLUE
Fresh from a stirring State of the Union Address, President Barack Obama, on Friday, followed his talk with a walk into a lion's den - the Republican House Caucus Retreat.
Just as Daniel of the Old Testament emerged unscathed from an actual den of lions, so too did Obama leave the GOP retreat no worse for wear. In fact, one could argue the President even outscored Biblical Daniel, by exposing the Republican lions he faced for the walking, talking point obstructionists they insist on being.
Rather than simply let another eloquent speech fall on deaf ears, Obama took questions - lots of them - from the GOP members of Congress. You can watch the attached video and decide for yourself, but fair to say each inquiry was handled with aplomb and challenged effectively.
The President took all kinds of shots from the right wing firing squad, and like Daniel wrapped in Kevlar, he deflected their verbal bullets, some even ricocheting back at the senders. For over an hour Obama endured what would otherwise be his own private Hell, his Dante's Inferno.
Alas, he embraced it, even seemed to enjoy taking the fight to his opposition. But not merely to expose the flaws in their arguments. This President intends to work with, not against, his opposition. By his actions Friday, it is clear he insists on both sides of the aisle finding common ground.
And he is more than willing to risk any of his own political capital in order to reach these ends. I believe Obama when he says he'd rather be a good one-term President, rather than a poor two-term-er. The very argument against Obama being President in 2008, his lack of experience, is exactly why he's the right man for the job now.
The rest of Washington is indeed cluttered with out-of-touch career politicians whose loyalties lie with lobbyists. Say what you will, but this President is hardly a lifer. Yet he's now closer to the end of his political career than to its start. Just seven years in the Illinois State Senate, and four years as U.S. Senator, Obama is on his way out as public servant. Whether he wins in 2012 or not.
Thus, I suggest Barack Obama is not beholden to the Democratic Party. An argument could even be made he, like other Presidents in the past, is larger than his party. Obama recognized in his appearance Friday it is independents who make up the fastest-growing segment of voters. So, for either party to cater to its extremes now would be ill-advised.
Analogous to Daniel, Obama is being judged for not worshiping what most are loyal. Daniel chose God over king, which got him thrown to the lions. Obama chooses you, the Americans, over political partisanship, but prevailing cynicism won't allow many to believe. But there he was Friday, in the lion's den, our President risking his political neck for you and I.
As of now, the ball is in the Republicans' court. Obama lent an ear to their minority, when another President could simply ignore them and force the agenda of his majority. They now have the opportunity to constructively work with this Administration. But they can't bring their talking points and debatable assertions to the bargaining table.
Also, it's now upon Americans to support bipartisan efforts. Time to turn off the negative talk TV/radio - both left and right - and encourage legislators to get on board or resign their office. Enough of the cynicism and doubt. If you can't conceive of it and believe in it, you most certainly can't achieve it.
Has Obama ever told the truth about anything. I can't find anything that isn't a provable lie.
John Yarmath will make up one excuse after another to keep the public from knowing Obama is dumber than a sack of rocks. No way Obama can pass a fifth grade class.
Buddy