Matthyse vs Kiram

Matthyse Linares

 

Fight night. HBO presents a twin bill of Linares vs Gesta and Matthyse vs Kiram.

In the first fight Jorge Linares fought a game challenger with a granite chin in Mercito Gesta. The fight was the most entertaining of the night as both fighters would at times stand in the pocket and look for the win with their thudding power. For Linares, it was about erasing the last fight’s split decision win and getting back to showing a dominant performance  to prove that he is the man at lightweight and so he can stay on the premium networks good graces and for Gesta, it was about becoming champion. What we saw was 12 rounds of give and take that led to Linares retaining the Lightweight championship. Linares hand speed and ring savvy proved too much for the game challenger who walked through Linares punches like he was walking in the park, enjoying a sunny day. Gesta, for his credit, never backed down and kept urging Linares to mix it up. In the end, Linares’ combinations and hand speed was too much. The fight would end with Linares’ hand being raised in a unanimous decision.

The main fight of the night was Lucas Matthyse vs. Tewa Kiram in a WBA welterweight championship. The fight started simple enough, the taller Kiram was peppering soft shots from the outside, maintaining a safe distance from the hard punching Argentine, Matthyse. Matthyse would get low and try and come inside to land to the body while slipping punches from the challenger who had 28 KO’s in his 38 fights. Matthyse was a little cautious due to the challenger’s record. You never know what real power the person in front of you has until you actually get hit with it yourself and his 28 KO’s made it seem like Kiram had some power. The fight was a cat and mouse affair for the first two rounds. Kiram was throwing quick shots from a distance while Matthyse was staying low and trying to land to the body, often missing due to Kiram’s movement. It wasn’t until late in the second round that Matthyse landed his first big right hand that had Kiram pawing at his face, seemingly looking if he had suffered a cut. When the third round began, Kiram started throwing hard meaningful shots to keep Matthyse off of him. Kiram didn’t want to get tagged again like he did at the end of the second round. Kiram now throwing harder shots and on his bike, it seemed it would only be a matter of time before he got tired and the Argentinian would land something. Anytime Matthyse landed some decent punches Kiram would hold. That would be the strategy for Kiram throughout the remaining rounds of the fight, hit and move and any time Matthyse made his way to the inside, hold for dear life. It wasn’t until the 8th round that Matthyse landed with a good 1-2 combination that would drop the Kiram to his back. The follow up barrage saw Matthyse land a hard jab or 2 punch, since it seems he was sort of in a southpaw position when he threw the punch, that would drop Kiram and end the fight. The fight itself was more of a technical fight until the 8th, when they were in each other’s range. Matthyse, still one of the hardest punching fighters in the game, showed that he still had a little left in the tank at age 35. Let’s hope for a big fight for the Argentinian, I think he deserves a big payday and maybe Spence, Garcia, Brook, Porter, or Thurman will give him that shot. If not, maybe Matthyse can drop to 140, a more suitable weight for him, and fight the winner of Garcia vs Lipinets.

The Free Trade Phenomenom

free trade

Holy crap, free trade is under attack. Are we going to survive? Yeah, we’ll be fine. Is free trade good, yes and no. Free trade agreements are made so we can globalize economy all over the world. So the world can become a community, that’s a good thing. So what’s the bad thing, well, while free trade has gone global, minimum wage and middle class has not. For globalization to work you first must have a globalization of fair pay and middle class wages. You can’t have one without the other. In any free trade treatise, (I looked that word up, it fits) it should be mandatory language that the country that wants these benefits must invoke a livable, sustainable and comparable living wage. Once that happens almost all other problems seize to exist.

If the government of all countries that are willing to enjoy the benefits of free trade were to impose a minimum wage that would make globalization a heck of a lot easier. Imagine that all countries had a middle class, there would be no need for tariffs at all. Manufacturing jobs would be in every country, almost. Shipping items long distance would be a thing of the past because it would be a whole lot cheaper just to build the items in that country because it would minimize shipping costs, take away from the bottom line. LG would cramped housebuild factories everywhere, not just where cheap labor is, because all labor is now comparative. That is the goal of globalization, isn’t it? As it stands, some of these countries that the President referred to are keeping wages artificially low so they can attract and induce manufacturers to go there. It’s a sound idea for the people that are running the country, reaping the reward of the manufacturing tax but these workers are living two families per home or live in homes that are 300 square feet, for a whole family, that’s like a college dorm.

People come to the United States with ideas of the American dream, the ability to buy a house and live in safe and secure neighborhood. America isn’t the only country that offers these things, so do others and people would love to migrate their too. Well, how about globalizing that dream to every country? How about if you couldn’t tell the difference between America and Haiti or El Salvador or any country in the world. Globalization is about making the world a better place, not about finding cheap labor. The U.S. is obviously in a position to try and rectify these situations and maybe taking a harsh stance on free trade would help it out. I don’t know, I’m not an economist but it seems to me that if everyone had a middle class, the backbone of great society, the free trade agreements wouldn’t be needed at all, isn’t that the goal, global harmony and unity not global cheap labor. I could be wrong, like I said, my economy degree comes from Crayola.

The payoffs of these actions would be incredible. Reductions in crime, illegal immigration (because everywhere is wonderful and no immigration would be illegal), deaths due to poor living conditions and hatred. Well, utopia has always been a dream of mine but it seems that the only way I’m going to see that is in the movies. I’m not saying this would lead to a perfect world, just a better one.

In a different note, sometimes, when you are correcting a problem, you are going to be hated. While I don’t agree with everything the President has done, mostly on immigration (DACA should be approved with attachments), some things that need to be corrected are going to be difficult and the person that fixes these problems will face opposition, sometimes in a great amount. Sometimes, being despised for doing the right thing is better than being liked and going with the flow when you know it isn’t right. It takes character to fix a worldwide problem but it’s better to be hated now and fix it then being liked and leaving the problem for the next guy. I don’t know if the “America First” agenda has to do with globalization, it might be a by product, but whatever works. Again, I don’t know if this is an attempt to fix globalization cheap labor but it seems that it can have an impact in promoting fair wages all over the world. Our former President’s, President Obama, biggest critique of the Free Trade Acts was the fact that countries were still not paying fair wages. I believe that President Obama’s thoughts and beliefs were that if this was enacted that countries would do the right thing and give those wages to their people and enact these laws because that would be what he would do, President Obama trusted in these leaders.

I believe in a strong America, I believe in a strong global community, I believe in a borderless global community where there’s only neighborhoods and no passports to get into those neighborhoods. I also believe in Santa Claus, so, at least in my lifetime, all of those are pretty much the same.

Freedom of The Press: Keep America Safe by buying a newspaper.

freedom of the press

The First Amendment, along with the rest of the Bill of Rights, was submitted to the states for ratification on September 25, 1789, and adopted on December 15, 1791. It reads as follows; Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. Being that this is the first amendment, our founding fathers thought that these particular rights were very important for the success of a democratic nation to succeed. Those were their first thoughts and inclinations on what was needed to establish a free society. That was why the most important war fought in our country’s history, the revolutionary war, was all about. I have a tremendous amount of respect for news organizations. They are, in many ways, the bedrock of our great society. They inform the masses of factual events and raise awareness to injustices that would threaten those freedoms. How important is a free press? To a democracy, it’s as important as breathing. But it isn’t enough for a press to be free, it also has to be fair and accurate. How important is a fair and accurate press, to the people that make up the democracy, well, not to sound redundant, but it’s as important as breathing.

When the American settlers decided to form their own government and break from, what they saw as, an oppressive monarchy, they had certain realizations in mind. Those realizations, the first ten amendments as well as the preamble to the constitution, weregeorge washington thought of and written in a time when their human and civil rights had been discarded and just regained. They were written when monarchies made the rule of law and decided what was best for everyone. They, the king or queen, would decide what was best for the people and they would also decide what information the people should know, what religion the people should practice, what they can utter in public and if they were allowed to protest. If anyone decided to disagree with them, they would be jailed, tortured or executed.

One of the greatest philosophers of our time and the person that most influenced our Constitution, John Locke (I’m an Immanuel Kant fan myself), was very aware of what

john locke
John Locke

tyrannical monarchies could do and wrote the Two Treatises of Government. Not to go to in depth about his works right now, it pretty much said that people should pick who governs, for which the monarchy exiled him and would later try and blame an attempted assassination of the king on his works. His only fault was that he wrote something that he felt was right and true, that all people are created equal. We would later find out that he only meant people that looked like him but the point is that he distributed these treatises and would later be punished for his views. He had no idea of knowing that those treatises would be the principles that formed our government today. The one that he did not write, the one that he, himself, openly demonstrated was the right to express your views as well as publicize them.

James Madison is credited as being the architect of the first amendment. His thoughts were that if he had to choose between a free government or a free press, that a free press was more important. John Adams, our second President, didn’t agree. He would enact a

james madison
James Madison

Sedition Act that could arrest press members if they wrote anything that was not true. The Sedition act would be repealed after he left office. What these Presidents knew, and every President from George Washington to our current President, have had to contend with is that the press, with the release of information, empowered the people, for information, factual information, is power. Ask the NSA, they are an agency built around that very motto. They don’t exactly agree with the dissemination of that information but they love gathering it. They’re the tight lipped relative that hears all the secrets but never tells anyone.

The importance of investigative journalism is detailed in an essay by former Managing Editor of the Washington Post, Robert Kaiser. He discusses the importance of a free press

woodward and berstein
Woodward and Berstein

in his latest Bookings Essay. How powerful is the press, it brought down a President, Nixon (1972, Woodward and Bernstein expose Watergate), it forces lawmakers to enact laws, the civil rights laws (tv news coverage of the atrocities happening), it fights corruption (1902, Ida Tarbell profiles J.D.  Rockefeller and the Standard Oil Co.), it fight sexual harassment and inequality (2017, #me too movement and 1992, Florence Graves reveals sexual misconduct in Congress), it fights government overreach (1953, Murrey Marder dogs Sen Joseph McCarthy’s witch hunt and 2013, NSA Surveillance on American Citizens). When it comes to politics, some organizations seem more like lobbyists then reporters, you just have to read both sides and see where the similarities are and where they differ to get the truth, but most outlets report facts when it comes to the above mentioned items. The press is as necessary to free society as oxygen is to living, there I go again, being redundant.

True journalism, not the barbie and ken dolls that get on TV and tell you what outfits to wear, but true journalism like the Woodward’s and Bernstein’s, Dan Rather’s, Daphne Caruan Galizia (Killed in a car bomb 10/2017), Eliah Lovejoy (anti-slavery abolitionist killed by angry mob 11/1837), Irving W. Carson (killed covering the civil war 4/1862),

freedom of press rating
Do you notice that the one’s that are orange and below are countries that you would never want to live in.

Walter Ligget (drive by shooting while reporting about mafia and political associations 12/1935), Don Bolles (car bomb while reporting about organized crime 6/1976), Manuel de dios Unanue (assassinated by Colombian drug cartel while reporting on the cartel’s activities 3/1992), Chauncey Bailey (shot dead on a Downtown Oakland street on August 2, 2007, the victim of a crime syndicate he was investigating for a story) is what this country is made of.

They’re not all dead, nor do they have to die to be a true journalist, some are still living;

  • Eric Lipton of The New York Times

    For reporting that showed how the influence of lobbyists can sway congressional leaders and state attorneys general, slanting justice toward the wealthy and connected.

  • Eric Eyre of Charleston Gazette-Mail, Charleston, WV

    For courageous reporting, performed in the face of powerful opposition, to expose the flood of opioids flowing into depressed West Virginia counties with the highest overdose death rates in the country.

  • Matt Apuzzo, Adam Goldman, Eileen Sullivan and Chris Hawley of the Associated Press

    For their spotlighting of the New York Police Department’s clandestine spying program that monitored daily life in Muslim communities, resulting in congressional calls for a federal investigation, and a debate over the proper role of domestic intelligence gathering.

  • David Barstow of The New York Times

    For his tenacious reporting that revealed how some retired generals, working as radio and television analysts, had been co-opted by the Pentagon to make its case for the war in Iraq, and how many of them also had undisclosed ties to companies that benefited from policies they defended.

  • Susan Schmidt, James V. Grimaldi and R. Jeffrey Smith of The Washington Post

    For their indefatigable probe of Washington lobbyist Jack Abramoff that exposed congressional corruption and produced reform efforts.

There’s more but I’m a blogger, not an author. Without these people, none of these issues would have been addressed, may I add at great peril to their safety and security. It isn’t easy telling the government that they are wrong, they don’t take it well, not well at all, trust me, I know.  Now, I know that some TV journalists have to fill their hour up, ratings matter so they can break these stories that are necessary, and I applaud them because I know that they want to hit the system hard with that they see wrong, they give you the fashion ten minute review so later then can give you a breaking news story. I don’t mean to degrade anyone.

Can we, today, invest in a journalistic magazine, buy an online subscription to a credible news source, not mine, a real one, keep America safe by buying a newspaper, trust me, you’ll thank me in the long run. By the way, I’m a fan of propublica, they make everyone look bad. Check out their site.