• 1) Who are the most accomplished political leaders who also played a professional sport? 
• 2) Should the citizens of Puerto La Cruz decide to elect Ordonez, how have professional athletes performed as political leaders?

First we turn to Issue 1.  For starters, there have been no US Presidents who have also played a professional sport, but  there have been a few Presidents with notable collegiate careers (and some who have purported to have been college athletes*). The Bench Jockeys dug into the stats and offer our top three for consideration:

• 3.  George H.W. Bush (#41 )was first baseman, batted .354 in his senior year and played in the College World Series for Yale.
• 2.  Dwight Eisenhower  (#34) was a linebacker and running back at Army, Nicknamed the “Kansas Cyclone,” Eisenhower injured his knee while tackling one of the greatest athletes of all time, Jim Thorpe, in the famous 1912 Carlisle vs. Army game.
• 1.  Gerald Ford (#38) was an All-American and played center for 1933 National Champion Univ. of Michigan Wolverines football team.  He was voted team MVP in his senior year.

*Although there was a great deal of talk about the college basketball career of Barack Obama, there seems to be no documentation of the assertion that Barack Obama led the Occidental College Men’s Basketball team in scoring in 1979 as has been reported.  He attended Occidental for two years and we can find no corroboration that as a freshman he even played on the school team.  (You never know what will surface when you start doing a little good ol’ fashioned investigative journalism.)  As for other professional sportsmen turned public servants, we found the following tasty tidbits for your consumption:  The most accomplished member of this select group is former US Senator from New Jersey, William “Bill” Bradley who was a member of the 1964 Olympic basketball team and was voted the NCAA Player of the Year in 1965. He played on the New York Knicks for ten years, winning two championship titles.   He was also a Rhodes Scholar so I am guessing he is a pretty smart chap.

US Congressmen from New York, Jack Kemp was appointed as Housing Secretary under George H.W. Bush. Kemp was selected as the Vice Presidential running mate in Bob Dole’s failed 1996 election campaign against Bill Clinton.  Ironically, like Barack Obama, Kemp also attended Occidental in the 1950’s where he was a record-setting javelin hurler and played several positions on the football team: quarterback, defensive back, place kicker and punter.  Interestingly Occidental does have a record of Kemp’s collegiate accomplishments.  Kemp went on to play professional sports as a quarterback for 13 years, with brief stints in the NFL and CFL, later securing star status in the AFL with the San Diego Chargers and Buffalo Bills.  Kemp was selected as the AFL’s Most Valuable Player award in 1965 after leading the Bills to a second AFL championship.

Although appointed to the role, defensive tackle and the most celebrated member of the Purple People Eaters, Alan Page, serves as a Justice on the Minnesota Supreme Court.  Fellow Minnesotan Jesse Ventura was elected as Governor of the state, but to count him would mean we are calling the WWE a professional sport – which it is not – so he is out.   However, the late Jack Mildren, a two-way player who over the course of a three year career with the Colts and Pats made three interceptions as a defensive back and rushed for 22 yards and threw 1 incomplete pass as a quarterback, served as Lt. Governor of Oklahoma.  He meets the pro-pol crossover criteria on paper. 

Internationally, there have been some instances of professional sportsmen transitioning  to public office.  Both Alexis Argüello, who was Mayor of Managua, Nicaragua for a few months before he was assassinated (or committed suicide depending on who you ask) and Philippine House of Representatives member, Emmanuel “Manny”  Pacquiao, were professional boxers who became mid-level political leaders.  Sanath Teran is a former Sri Lankan cricketer and a current member of the Parliament of Sri Lanka.  Ari Uolevi Vatanen is a Finnish rally car driver who won the World Rally Championship in 1981 and the Paris Dakar Rally four times was a member of the European Parliament.  But perhaps the most successful foreign-born professional athlete is Donald Ross Getty, a Canadian politician who served as the Premier of Alberta after quarterbacking the Edmonton Eskimos of the Canadian Football League.  As Premier, Getty served as the de facto Chief Executive for the territory.  Nice work.

And then there is Ahhhhnold.  If bodybuilding is a truly professional sport – and according to ABC’s Wide World of Sports (which I grew up watching as a kid) it is – The Austrian Oak’s election as Governator of California has to trump them all.  But notice some interesting coincidences…and that leads us directly into Issue 2.  Schwarzenegger oversaw the workings of one the most financially unstable states in the US, with the majority of Californians suggesting his limited concepts of state management made fiscal matters even worse.  Imagine that?  

Similarly, there have been two US mayors who were former professional athletes: the Mayor of recently bankrupt Detroit is former NBA-er Dave Bing and the Mayor of cash-strapped Sacramento is Kevin Johnson, formerly of the Phoenix Suns.  (As a former Bullet, I like Dave Bing, but that’s a big 0 for 2 on assuming NBA skills sets prepare players for the complexities of leading a city.)

Which brings us right back to Ordonez.  What experience during his 15 year career in the Major Leagues possibly prepares Magglio Ordonez for the leadership of Puerto La Cruz?  Given the vast anthology of professional sports figures who have come and gone over the last 125 years, success stories are scarce.  In fact, the lion’s share of those stories can be condensed into less than 1000 words (see above).  Ex-athletes seem to be able to serve as a part of a body politic, or a team, but when it comes to leading a state or a city, they fall flat.  With the exception of Don Getty, there is no success story where a professional athlete was elected to the role of a chief executive of a city, state or province.  Bill Bradley and Jack Kemp were strong representatives of a constituency, but effectively leading that same populace requires a completely different array of talents.  Maggs, please reconsider your political aspirations before you get in over your head, or even worse, lose it.  

Issue 2.  Despite never having won a Grand Slam event, Caroline Wozniacki continues to retain the top rank in the WTA.  The Dane will again be designated as a number 1 seed as the first Slam event of the year – the Aussie Open – commences later this month.  Unfortunately, C-Woz has suffered premature exits over the course of the 2011 Grand Slam events:  Australian – ousted in the Semis; French – 3^rd Round departure; Wimbledon – 4^th Round loss; US – eliminated in the Semis, and aside from a 2009 US Open finals appearance, she continues to underwhelm in the majors.  Wozniacki does feast on the smaller venues, but Petra Kvitova is gaining ground and should slip past Wozniacki shortly.  Nevertheless, Caroline is the poster girl for women’s tennis and is already featured on the 2012 US Open promotional materials.

Third. Can Ron Paul win the GOP nomination?   In a word, “No.”  In spite of the 3^rd place in Iowa and his 2^nd place in NH, Ron Paul cannot beat Barack Obama if Paul were to be selected as the GOP’s candidate.  And the GOP strategists know it.  The good doctor’s second place finish in New Hampshire speaks more to the lack of a solid contender, than it does to the serious consideration of Paul’s candidacy.  It also is an indicator that the GOP is not ready to coalesce behind Romney.  Paul will stay in this race and carve off enough of a vote to keep Mitt’s other opponents at bay.  That’s great for Romney winning primaries but bad for both 1) the GOP which will continue to experience a lack of plurality for Mitt’s candidacy and 2) the remaining four candidates who will be unable to mount a challenge.

Jon Huntsman absolutely needed to top Ron Paul in New Hampshire, and even amid Huntsman’s claims that he is “in the hunt,” Big Bad Jon will likely be out between South Carolina on January 21st and Nevada on February 4^th.  Perry must get a significant bounce out of the southern swing in SC and Florida or he will be next to cash in his chips.  Santorum’s second place finish in Iowa (or possibly victory in Iowa if you believe the conspiracy theorists) will allow him to get to Super Tuesday (March 6^th) provided he is not taken to the woodshed in Florida on January 31^st and does something in Arizona and Michigan on February 28^th.

And that leaves Newt.  Aside from someone jumping into the fray before too many delegates are allocated, GOP faithful, Gingrich is your Plan B.

Both Democrats and Republicans oppose the intervention for an array of reasons:

• the cost of the effort,
• the potential for escalation and the US long-term role in a prolonged civil war,
• the message it sends to other countries about the US definition of sovereignty, and
• the lack of defined objectives

But the true Congressional opposition lies in the potential for unchecked military action in the Executive Branch by the weakening of the War Powers Resolution of 1973 (WPR).  By soft-peddling the President’s actions in Libya, the Administration hasembarked on a troublesome journey along a slippery slope by asserting that the Libyan intervention does not rise to the level of ‘hostilities,’ a term that remains undefined by the WPR.  On behalf of the Administration, State Department legal advisor, Harold Koh, contends that the use of unmanned drones for attack, the limited risk of harm to US forces and the limited ability for Libyan forces to exchange meaningful fire with US forces suggest that the US actions in Libya do not warrant the financial and reporting disclosures mandated by the War Powers Resolution.  In order words: no accountability required.

However, those arguments belie the critical role of Congress in the brave new world of technological warfare.  If we buy what Mr. Koh is selling, all future drone and US-based missile attacks would not technically involve face to face conflict or imperil ground troops, and therefore, such actions would fall outside of Congressional oversight.  However, the use of a faceless military force against another nation does not create any fewer ramifications for the US or its citizens.  The WPR was not simply developed to protect our soldiers from direct harm; it was promulgated to ensure the President did not engage in military action without full accountability and oversight from the Legislative Branch as originally contemplated by Art. 1, Sec 8 of the US Constitution.

History Lesson:   The War Powers Resolution of 1973 was written as a modification of the original War Powers Act of 1941 that FDR initiated which granted him greater authority to reorganize the executive branch, independent government agencies, and government corporations, as well as censor mail and other forms of communication between the United States and foreign countries during World War II.  A Second War Powers Act was passed in 1942 further extending executive branch power, allowing for the acquisition (under condemnation if necessary) of land for military or naval purposes.   In the aftermath of the Korean War and during the last phases of the Vietnam War, Congress re-examined the broad powers conferred by the WPA and drafted the War Powers Resolution of 1973, designed to re-establish the checks and balances associated with the engagement of the US Military consistent with the intent of the Framers of the Constitution.

This week, by a vote of 14-5, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, with four Republicans crossing the aisle – Rubio (FL), Inhofe (OK), Isakson (GA), and Barrasso (WY) – authorized US involvement in the NATO-led mission in Libya.  The measure will now go to the Republican-controlled House for consideration. If adopted, SFRC language would permit US involvement in Libya for up to one year, however, there would be no authorized ground support.

Circling back to the WPR [and absent from the majority of the media accounts from the recent SRFC vote]…. Ranking Member, Dick Lugar (IN) addressed Harold Koh/ the Administration’s characterization of the Libyan intervention, and on June 28th, defined the current US military operations in Libya as ‘hostilities’ for the purposes of the War Powers Resolution within the SFRC Resolution .  In doing so, he put a roadblock in the Administration’s interpretation of the Libyan intervention “from becoming an accepted precedent that future administrations may rely on to conduct significant and prolonged military engagements without Congressional authorization.”

We still do not have an answer as to the Executive Branch’s objective in Libya, but we do have some limits on how long the Congressional rope will be.  All I know is that the political landscape has been turned on its axis.  Republican hawks are now calling for stricter oversight in the consideration of military action (the former GOP economic stimulus package) and the dove-loving Democrats are now seeking expansive executive powers in the deployment of military assets on foreign soil.  Could this be the ripple effects of Japan’s earth-tilting earthquake?

On the flip side, I think all Presidents could use a DH.  While those who sit in the Oval Office think they can do everything (the obvious character flaw in politicians being oversized EGOs) who wouldn’t need a little help in running the country?  Watching President Obama’s lack of business sense filter through the economy, it seems we would be better served if a professional businessperson came in and pinch hit.  President George W. Bush needed a designated speaker so he would never have had to open his mouth in public and record an error.  The DH concept could trickle down right into our homes.  What parent wouldn’t want a professional nanny to come in and discipline their kids when mom and dad were too gassed to continue the inning?  Wouldn’t most families love to have a designated kitchen cleaner for mop-up duties?

The first DH in baseball was Ron Bloomberg.  My favorite was Edgar Martinez, who spent his entire career with the Seattle Mariners.  As a baseball purist, I would dump the DH.  But in today’s ADHD society, the average  fan’s desire to see home runs, and the constant barrage of Top 10 highlights on every sports channel, it’s hard to see it going anywhere.

When President Obama extended the Bush tax cuts, his donkey’s snout became an elephant’s trunk.  When President Bush enacted TARP, his elephant ears shrunk to the size of a donkey’s. Maybe this country would be better off if  all the states were purple.  Today we have the moderate Blue Dog Democrats, Boll weevils (which are conservative southern Democrats), gypsy moth Republicans (typically moderate representing north eastern and midwestern urban areas), and of course the Tea Party, based on conservative and libertarian views.  All hybrids, aimed at combining the best aspects of two philosophies.

It’s a great mental exercise.  Think of two things you like (or dislike) and consider how they’d be if they were combined into one.  Then come up with a name.  Let us know your suggestions.  I’ll lead off.  How about a cross between a puma and an orangutan…

In 1905, the US switched to a system of primaries designed to assign delegates/votes to party-based candidates.  Since the initiation of the primary system, the only President to decline to compete for his party’s nomination for a second term was LBJ – who smelled blood in the water after only narrowly beating Eugene McCarthy in the New Hampshire primary while fearing the political clout of Bobby Kennedy.

Among the GOP contenders, Paddy Power grades Mitt Romney at 10:1 and Mitch Daniels is at 12:1 to win the 2012 election.  The Bench Jockeys odds posted on the following page contemplate the likelihood of securing the GOP nomination, not the 2012 popular election; however, we are giving newly designated CIA Director, General David Petraeus a downgrade to 30:1.  We think Petraeus will have his hands full in Langley as he is ultimately responsible for being the nation’s eyes and ears; it is unlikely he will contemplate a run in 2012 so soon after assuming the helm at the CIA.  We think he is more of a candidate in 2016.  Further, as a “Rockefeller Republican” – a pro-business, socially liberal New Englander – he is a bit outside the current direction of the GOP.

We have established the odds for every candidate who has either formed an “exploration committee” or may be jumping (or being pushed) into the Republican race against Barack Obama.  We have also included a few Independents and a Libertarian just to stay trendy, but we all know that the President will emerge from either the Republican or Democratic ranks.  As additional candidates step into the fray, we will keep you posted with updates and current odds.  When news happens that impacts a particular candidate’s odds of being selected by his/her party, we will tweet about it and post to this page.  Follow us on Twitter @benchjockeys.

And now,… ladies and gentlemen,… the nation’s first comprehensive oddsmaker lines for the Repulican Party’s nomination for the 2012 Presidential Election.

 **For the Independents and Libertarians, odds posted are the odds of winning the presidency. 

We welcome your comments and feedback and let the posturing begin.

Not to over-simplify, but the Odyssey Dawn game plan was to attack from the outside to weaken Libyan strongholds, limit Gadhafi’s ability to attack from the air and allow the rebel forces to take control of territory in chunks.  Okay, not a bad plan….  if you’re playing Risk against an eight year old.    But unlike basketball or board games there were some important endgame decisions that required deliberation before the game plan was initiated.  Here are a just a few…

• Who exactly is leading this insurgency and who will be running the show in Libya if the rebels succeed in toppling Gadhafi?
• What happens if the no-fly zone results in a stalemate?  How long could the US potentially be engaged in Libya? 
• Is there any situation where the US would send in ground troops?
• What if Gadhafi simply agrees to relinquish control of the rebel strongholds in the east in exchange for US/NATO withdrawal?  That’s all the rebels really seem to want so they would have their endgame goal.  Does that make a divided Libya an acceptable result to the US/NATO?
• Will US military engagement be the practice de rigueur when insurgents in other countries seek dynamic democratic restructure?

It’s easy to say – after the game – that Butler should have reconsidered its offensive strategy when UConn began its run early in the 2^nd half.  And it is likely that adjustments to the game plan were discussed but the Bulldogs could not successfully implement those changes.  The difference here is that Butler fully considered its opponent’s capabilities and aspirations, understood its own unified goal, knew the game would not end in a stalemate, and recognized the need for a fully-integrated plan of action involving all facets of the team  to succeed in attaining its objective.  To date, nothing coming from the Executive Branch has offered that much clarity with respect to our involvement in Lybia and endgame analysis.

Fast Fact:  Gadhafi has been cagey enough to stay in control of his country for 42 years.  He orchestrated (through Britain) Scotland’s release of a known terrorist on alleged humanitarian grounds.  He employs a deadly 40-member, all-female bodyguard team trained in martial arts and firearms.  And Italy’s Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi thinks Gadhafi is the cat’s pajamas (probably in part because there is a 323 mile pipeline filled with Libyan oil running under the Mediterranean Sea to Sicily).

It just seemed appropriate that The Bench Jockeys initiated their Blog to coincide with the start of the 2011 MLB Season.  Although there is nothing like debating AL and NL Pennant chances for the upcoming baseball season and analyzing the strengths, but more likely, the weaknesses of current and former ML players, starting this Blog at this time offers The Bench Jockeys the opportunity to assess the potential play-off scenarios in the National Hockey League, as well as the contenders and the pretenders for the Green Jacket, which is  just around the corner on April 7th.  The NBA is just absolute garbage, so you won’t see much from us about that steaming pile, but you will be able to read about the Final Four and VCU’s improbable run.  (We don’t hate basketball, we just hate the NBA.)  Conflicts, oddities and head-shaking actions within NASCAR, soccer, tennis, even the much-maligned PBA, will be served up with cheeky commentary and exploration.

But it’s not just about sports here at The Bench Jockeys, oh no.  We have opinions about any number of subjects.  And along with the sports banter, we intend to mix in a fair share of analysis about the national political scene, potential domestic and global crises, and of course, we fully intend to heckle leaders deserving of derision.  We hope that you will come along for the ride and participate in the discourse.

Oh, and in case you didn’t notice it in the pic above, Barack Obama is a lefty.  Now, there’s a big surprise.

We think The Plus-Minus has applicability to an array of scenarios.  At its core, it is essentially a measure of how a team performs when certain participants are involved in the effort.  In this Blog, entries categorized under our section appropriately named, The Plus-Minus, concern matters where we are either: a) looking for your participation, input and opinion; b) offer a comparative analysis of a sport, team, or player; c) consider the merits of a particular gameplan [whether that strategy relates to sports (e.g. the intentional walk to create a doubleplay opportunity), politics (e.g. the selection of Sarah Palin as the White Tornado’s running mate in 2008) , or controversial decision-making (e.g. Barack Obama’s decision to join the UN Coalition action in Libya, thereby initiating an act of war without seeking Congressional consent)]; or d) all of the above.

We fully expect that The Plus-Minus will be heralded as the newest evaluation tool in a wide range of team sports and political discourse.   See our Sidebar for any of a number of our hotly debated sporting or political matters.

Fast fact:  20 year defensive stalwart, Larry “Big Bird” Robinson of Les Habs holds the all-time career highest Plus-Minus of +730.  The “Great One” finished his career in 3rd place –  212 behind Robinson – but he is the highest non-defenseman.