Political Incorrectness in Action

I heard them chattering to one another as I held up the line to finish filling out the form.

The form allowed us to send somebody behind the voting machine with an elderly voter who requested help. I was holding up the line to complete the form.

"This is how easy it happens," I heard her say as I added the voter's address after looking it up.

"Yeah, from what I heard, it's going on everywhere," he responded as I signed my name. "You can't trust the system."

I finished and smiled at them. The man looked back with equal parts distrust and disgust. We signed them in and they moved on.

The above is a re-creation of what I heard Tuesday about 11 a.m. at Lower Allen 6. I can't say with certainty what they were talking about, or that the man's look was directed toward me.

He might have been annoyed with the 15-20 minute wait times. I am 85 percent sure they were talking about "it." The wonderfully liberating political incorrect narrative that the system is "rigged" and voter fraud is rampant.

I do know that I've worked six election days now. And I can say with 99 percent certaintly that I didn't hear a single concern about this during the five previous elections.

I heard 7-8 comments Tuesday from our voters. I escorted one woman to the machine and explained how it works. She had but one question: "this isn't going to change my vote to the other candidate after I leave is it?"

I felt a pinch of sadness for her as I walked away.

Of course, there has been voter fraud in our history. Just like movie theaters have burned down.

But you still can't yell "fire!" in a crowded theater. Shaking off the shackles of politically correct speech has a certain charm, but it can be dangerous, too.

When people stop believing in the levers of government, it's a short road to anarchy.

Hopefully, we are done with this.

Your Phillies Offseason Primer

With the season winding down, attention will soon turn to the offseason for our favorite Phightins. And it will be an active Hot Stove for the Phils.

I doubt there's a team in MLB with more assets and flexibility to deal than the Phillies. They can literally go a dozen different ways and it will be interesting which paths they take.

Will they continue to be patient? Or will they push ahead toward contention? Whatever they want to do, they have the chips to do it.

Let's break it down:

40-Man Roster Decisions: Last year, the Phillies added four players to the 40-man roster; the year before they added three. This is typical of most teams.

The current state of the Phillies' farm system is atypical. They lack top-end superstar projectible talent, but otherwise, they are loaded with ML prospects. They will add as many as a dozen players to the 40-man roster this fall.

(By way of background, players must be added to the 40-man within five years if they were drafted or signed at 18 or before, or within four years in they were drafted or signed at 19 or later. It's more complicated than that, but those are the basics. Players in this category who are not protected this way are eligible to be selected in the Rule 5 draft in December)

Players who must (and will) be added include: OF Nick Williams, C Andrew Knapp, SP Ben Lively, SP Ricardo Pinto, SP Elniery Garcia, OF Dylan Cozens, SP Alberto Tirado, SP Mark Appel and SP Nick Pivetta.

Then it gets tricky. Any team that selects a player in the Rule 5 draft must keep him in the Major Leagues all season. Will someone take a flier on slick-fielding, light-hitting SS Malquin Canelo? Or intriguing 2B Jesmuel Valentin? Or big-armed reliever Miguel Nunez? Or 20-year-old raw power OF Jose Pujols? Or OF defensive whiz Carlos Tocci?

The Phils want to keep all five, but can they spare the roster spots?

Seven veteran free agents will free up seven spots. Some other veterans like Darren Ruf, Phil Klein, Colton Murray and Patrick Schuster will certainly lose their spots.

But the Phils want to sign some free agents, too. Let's take a look at that group.

Free Agency: Unless players just flat out boycott the Fightins, GM Matt Klentak is going to sign him some free agents.

A safe bet is one starting pitcher and one middle-of-the-lineup hitter. Our SP starts with Jeremy Hellickson. Whether it ends there depends on the player.

The Phils will likely make him a qualifying offer and be happy to pay him $17 million for one year. Or will they work out a long-term deal? I think a three-year, $40 million deal makes some sense.

Full disclosure: I wasn't too excited about Helly when he arrived via trade, but he's been good. Was it just contract-year focus?

If Hellickson signs elsewhere, the Phils will take a draft pick. Other internal options include a one-year option on Charlie Morton for $9.5 million. I'm not sure they'll be too interested in that given Morton's inability to last beyond April this year.

Other SP possibilies are too numerous to name here and include free agency and trades.

Several bats have been connected to the Phils. Let's look at three names that would represent a couple different strategies:

1. Martin Prado. I think this is my preference. Prado checks all the boxes: leader, position flex and, unlike our current lineup, he gets on base. Despite playing nearly every game this season, Prado K'd just 64 times and has a .364 OBP. He would replace Andres Blanco as a Phils leader. Jon Heyman projects 3 years, $33 million.

2. Jose Bautista. This would represent a different direction and might indicate the execs think the Phils are closer to contention that I do. Bautista is nearly 36 and he only plays OF and he will play every day he's healthy. In short, he's a major personality who would take over the clubhouse and be the face of the team. Is that good? I am torn. Bautista is definitely an on-base machine when healthy. But would this be another Danny Tartabull signing? Heyman: 3 years, $60 million.

3. Ian Desmond. Similar to Prado in that he has position flex for IF or OF. Otherwise, I do not like this at all. Desmond's career average for 162 games is 41 walks against 157 Ks. Not what this team needs. Sure, he has 22 homers. But Freddy Galvis has 19 homers and just 6 errors. Desmond is a failed defender at SS who averaged 22 errors his last three years with the Nats and hit .244 in 2014-15. Pass. Heyman: 4 years, $64 million.

Trade Route: Let's talk about the Phillies' farm system for a moment. The Phillies' U.S.-based farm teams combined for a .595 winning percentage, the best of any franchise over the past eight years.

Simply put, the Phils' system is loaded with perhaps three dozen future Major Leaguers. In particular, teenage prospects with high ceilings. The Phils' rookie Gulf Coast League franchise went 43-15 this summer.

If there's such a thing as having too many prospects, the Phillies are close. That 40-man roster crunch eventually becomes an issue.

Secondly, the Phillies have some Major League trade chips. One, in particular, in C Cameron Rupp. Solid catching is in short supply across MLB, but the Phillies have one of the best in Rupp, a solid defender with 24 doubles and 15 homers.

Perhaps as important, he won't command big money until 2021. With Knapp and Jorge Alfaro, the Phils also have perhaps the best pair of catcher prospects in the game.

Thirdly, and this is big, the Phillies have just $24.2 million in salary commitments for 2017. Of course, contracts will be renewed for a slew of young players and those should add up to about $15 million or so.

If the Phils match their 2016 payroll of $88 million, that leaves close to $50 million to play with. What it means is the Phils are an attractive trade partner for fat contracts.

If, say, the Red Sox want to rid themselves of the balance of Pablo Sandoval's $95 million deal, they might look south. Klentak will ask for a frontline player to be included.

The Phillies' needs are obvious -- an ace starter and a couple All-Star caliber offensive players. Klentak's task is to find them, and he has every available tool with which to do so.

What would you do?

My Midseason Top 10 Phils Prospects

It's the All-Star Break and I've seen two midseason prospect lists this week. Seems like I'm due to unveil the Hilton Top 10.

Here we go:

1. That Crawford kid. The most obvious pick on the list. Right now, JP is ranked more on his potential than actual production, but that potential is breathtaking. He's a bonofide five-tool player at the game's marquee position.

Put it this way: Take the best of Jimmy Rollins and Derek Jeter and you have Crawford's potential. He'll be a far superior defender to Jeter, while his walk and OBP will make fans forget Jimmy's first-pitch popups.

A stud.

2. SP Jake Thompson. I have concerns about the low strikeout rate, and he has more walks than you'd like. But my theory is simple: by the time players get to Triple A, they are facing Major League opponents every night. Maybe not every at-bat, but the majority of Triple A players are either former or future big leaguers.

And Thompson has flat-out dominated. He's 7-5 with a 2.58 ERA on the season, with 88 hits in 104 innings. But in his last seven starts, covering 49.1 innings, Thompson has allowed four runs.

He's ready.

3. OF Nick Williams. Many lists have Williams second and Thompson third. I like the pitcher's consistency and polish at this point. As everyone knows, Williams has been benched three times this year.

I don't think it's a long-term problem, but more a case of tough love that will benefit Williams down the line. He does has a quick bat and high athleticism. He's hitting .287 with 20 doubles, 4 triples and 8 home runs.

He's close.

4. C Jorge Alfaro. Some injury concerns here, but Alfaro has tremendous power and a rocket arm. He's hit .287 with 11 homers and 46 RBIs at Double A. He had 5 walks in his first 53 games, and eight walks in his last five games.

That's encouraging if it continues. Seems he is working on that part of his game. Possibly the best catcher prospect in baseball.

5. OF Mickey Moniak. The first four are easy. It gets interesting at No. 5. I'm going with the kid. Yes, he's just a few weeks out of high school, but being the No. 1 overall pick carries some cache. And the Phils under Joe Jordan have nailed these first picks.

Oh, and it doesn't hurt that Mickey Mo is hitting .400 through seven Gulf Coast League games.

6. 2B Scott Kingery. OK, now it gets really interesting. I love Scott Kingery. He's had the kind of season professional hitters have, stacking solid game upon solid game. I love the comparisons to Dustin Pedroia (diminuitive second baseman from Arizona colleges).

At present, Kingery is showing doubles power -- his 27 doubles are 10 more than all but three other players in the tough Florida State League -- but that should turn into a few home runs with time.

I love that Kingery set a goal this year, to be a better base stealer, and achieved it. His 22 steals are fifth in the FSL. I love how he hit leadoff for a long stretch, then spent a few weeks batting third. Lately, he's been hitting second. To me, that's a sign the big club sees him as a top-of-the-order hitter.

I expect Kingery to rip up the Eastern League next year and be the Phils' opening day second baseman in 2018.

7. OF Cornelius Randolph. It's been a rough year for the 2015 first-round pick. But I still remember the strong start in the GCL last year, when he hit .302 with 32 walks/32 Ks. Randolph was on an 8-13 streak with Lakewood before a shoulder injury knocked him out for more than two months.

He is back in the Lakewood OF and should be fine.

8. C Andrew Knapp. I was going to leave Andrew off this list until I heard the CSN Philly guys talking him up. Not because the bat has been so-so -- .266, 7 homers, 30 RBIs.

I think the bat will be fine, but I am not sure catching is in Knapp's future. And I couldn't put him on this list as a first baseman, where he'll likely end up. Andrew has devoted his attention to defense this year, and the results have been shaky. He has 7 errors and 10 passed balls. Unacceptable.

But, as the CSN guys reminded me, Knapp is still a switch hitter with power from both sides who hit .308 last year with 35 doubles and 13 homers.

Let's keep him right here.

9. SP Adonis Medina. The Phils have had some disappointments within the starting pitching crew. Notably, Kilome, Pinto and Asher. The 19-year-old Medina has dominated and offers thrilling potential.

In four starts at short-season A ball, Medina has allowed 7 hits and 1 run in 22.1 innings. You'd like to see more than nine Ks, but he seems to know how to pitch and how to get outs. That's rare in a young guy.

Of course, the minors are filled with young pitchers who can get young hitters out. But Medina reportedly can throw it up to 95, with a promising slider and change.

10. 1B Rhys Hoskins. Lots of candidates for this last spot. Pitchers Ben Lively and Nick Pivetta have done well. OF Roman Quinn was on fire until yet another injury. But this spot comes down to Hoskins or his home run partner, Dylan Cozens.

I am surprised Hoskins won my vote to be honest. But he is posting his second straight strong season, following up 17 homers and 90 RBIs with 25 home runs (and counting) at Double A. His average is above .300 during that time.

Hoskins was a 5th round pick, just like another pretty good Phillies first baseman named Howard.

But Hoskins is here over Cozens because of his splits. He does have 16 homers at the Reading launching pad, but he also has 14 doubles and 9 homers on the road.

Cozens, on the other hand, has 17 doubles and 20 homers at home, compared to 9 and 4 on the road.

I'm concerned that Hoskins is just another plodding righty with little speed who strikes out a lot. A lot of those guys, like Mark Reynolds and Russell Branyon, to name two, don't make it.

But in a season where the lumbering Mark Trumbo is rescuing his career, I'm giving Hoskins a shot.

Is Clayton Kershaw the Greatest Pitcher of All Time?

East Coast Bias is a real thing, especially when it comes to sports.

We only hear about the greatness of players such as Clayton Kershaw. I watched CK pitch a full game on Sunday night, perhaps for the first time.

The ESPN initiated a discussion on where Kershaw ranks among the all-time greats. I listened, watched and researched. And this guy might be the most perfect pitcher to ever take the mound.

Here's a guy who spots a fastball like Greg Maddux. He has a wipe-out slider like Steve Carlton, and a 12-to-6 curveball like Barry Zito. And he has a deceptive, funky deliver to boot.

Just an extraordinary package. His control is such that he reached 100 strikeouts Sunday against just 5 walks.

One of the very hardest things to achieve in baseball is consistent dominance. This sport is not like the NFL, where we know before the season that Tom Brady is going to toss 30+ TDs. Or the NBA, where you can bank on Lebron averaging 27+ a game.

It is extremely tough to sustain dominance in MLB. Especially from the mound. Check back in two years and see where Jake Arietta is at.

Clayton Kershaw is in his eighth year of complete domination of the Senior Circuit. During that time, he has compiled a 2.26 ERA, 10 strikeouts per nine and an astounding 0.983 WHIP (walks + hits per innings pitched).

To post a WHIP below 1 for even a season is a phenonomal accomplishment. To do it over eight years is otherworldly.

But easily the most impressive stat concerning Kershaw is his hits per inning stat. He ranks second all time, giving up 6.6 hits per nine.

When I looked up the all-time list, I expected to see some of the game's greatest starters. That's not the case at all. The top is populated by wild arms who had great stuff, like Nolan Ryan.

Nolan gave up the fewest hits per nine of any pitcher in ML history. But he walked 2,795 batters! The similarly wild Sandy Koufax and Sid Fernandez are also in the top five.

Relief pitchers Trevor Hoffman and Mariano Rivera place in the top 10.

Only Ryan and Koufax are in the Hall of Fame among the ten toughest pitchers to hit of all time.

But Kershaw is the only one who can be called a complete pitcher, a control pitcher. The significance is extraordinary. He's a pitcher who throw strike after strike, yet nobody can hit him.

Yes, Kershaw needs to shed the postseason monkey. That goes without saying.

But it might be worth staying up late for some of those Dodger games. We just might be seeing the best pitcher of all time.

The Next Phillie Call-up Will Be (Not Who You Think) ...

The Lehigh Valley IronPigs are 8-2 in their last 10 games and sit in second place in the International League North Division.

Unlike past Phillies' Triple A teams, the Pigs are fueled by genuine future major leaguers, rather than MLB retreads. The team is stocked with several future Phillies polishing up a few final flaws to the satisfaction of the Broad Street brass.

First baseman Tommy Joseph was the first Pig to get the call. With the big club clinging to contention, Phillies' fans are eagerly anticipating the next.

Will it be Nick Williams to add some offense to the woeful outfield? Maybe Zach Eflin to punch up the flagging rotation? Even IF Taylor Featherston has a fan club of one among my Phillies circle.

No, no and nope. The next Pig called to Philly will be Edubray Ramos.

If you're asking "Who?" at this point, I am with you. I never heard of young Ramos until a couple months ago, but he has compiled an impressive record moving through the system.

The Ramos story is fascinating. Bob Brookover covered it in this February profile. Like a lot of teenagers in Latin America and South America, Ramos converted his baseball talent into a lottery ticket out of hopeless poverty.

And just as quickly, after posting a 9.53 ERA in the Venezuelan Summer League, it was over. Just 17 years old, he was out of baseball in 2011 and 2012.

The Phillies are one of just a few teams who continue to seek players in the deteriorating Venezuela. They signed Ramos in 2013. After converting to a full-time relief role, he dominated.

In 2014, Ramos posted a culmulative 0.81 ERA at three stops; In 2015, a 2.07 ERA with two teams, reaching Double A.

So far this year, Ramos has a 1.54 ERA in 17 games. He is unscored upon in seven Triple A games. Simply put, he is ready to help the big club.

Two things stand out with Ramos. Number one, he can pitch multiple innings. His 17 appearances cover 23.1 innings.

But here's the stat that Pete Mackanin and Bob McClure have to love: he has allowed one walk. That's right -- one walk in 23.1 innings. For you saber guys, that translates to a 0.73 WHIP.

If you flung your TV remote and now you can't find the little battery door (which I may or may not have done) at the sight of Andrew Bailey walking two batters in a tight 2-0 game Saturday, you welcome a pen shakeup.

Bailey isn't the answer. Colton Murray isn't a major leaguer. If the Phillies are going to continue to chase a 75-win successful season, they'll do it on the backs of the bullpen. I think it's a legit strength.

And Ramos will fit in nicely as a bridge to Neris/Gomez.

You'll see him soon.

Should the Phillies Make a Play for Trout?

Everyone in Philliesland has an opinion on what kid GM Matt Klentak should do next.

He should promote Nick Williams; He should acquire a bat; He should trade the No. 1 draft pick for Andrew Luck. OK, only long-suffering Birds' fans dream of that last one.

The issue of the day is whether the Phils' 24-18 record is anything remotely real. I don't think it is, but that has nothing to do with what I am proposing here.

The next time the Angels drop seven of eight, MacPhail, Middleton & Klentak should dial up Anaheim GM Billy Eppler and offer any five prospects on the Philly system for Mike Trout.

The Angels are in a tough spot, since they really can't get comparable value for Trout. There's only one other player remotely like him, and the Nationals aren't trading Bryce Harper.

Trout is roughly the equivelant of two All-Star caliber players. Baseball Reference tells me that a 5+ WAR is an All Star. Trout averaged about 9.4 WAR the past four seasons. You put Trout alongside Herrera and a breathing body and the Phils are getting 15+ WAR from their OF.

That would make them immediate contenders.

Still, our top FIVE propspects, you say? Won't that devastate out greatest resource -- the bountiful farm? No.

Such a trade is still a lopsided win for the Phils, which is why Eppler will smile politely and pretend he has an incoming call. But ... maybe Trout and his agent get involved. Maybe his overwhelming desire to play close to home makes the Angels think about it. After all, Anaheim has one of the worst farm systems anyone has ever seen.

A few reasons why this is a good deal for the Phils:

1. It's prospects from the prospect list. That means Nola, Franco, Herrera, Neris, Eickhoff and Velasquez are not eligible. Fact is most prospects do not pan out. Remember Kyle Drabek, Michael Taylor, Lou Marson, Jon Singleton, Jared Cosart or Anthony Gose? They were all prospects Phils' fans did not want to trade.

2. Yes, it will hurt to give up Crawford, but...  You've got to give up something to get something, and when you're getting a future Hall of Famer a full three years from his prime, you only hope that an elite SS prospect who hails from Cali will entice the Angels enough to bite.

3. A Quick Reload. Phils have that No. 1 pick in a draft that has no Harper and no Trout. Various accounts have MMK preparing to spread around their vast draft cash pool with an eye toward adding two, or even three 1st round caliber talents. In addition, they are expected to sign two of the top international prospects. The Phils could ship out their top five prospects and still have a top 10 system heading into the offseason.

4. Depth, depth, depth. Some of the Phils' farm standouts thus far are not even on many top 10 or top 20 lists. Guys like OFs Dylan Cozens (an Eastern League-leading 11 HRs, 9 SBs) and Jose Pujols (leading the Sally League in HRs), and 2B Scott Kingery are playing their way onto the MMK farm reports. Fact is, the Phils' system is loaded with No. 3-4 starters and No. 6 hitters. They need an ace starter and a cleanup masher.

Swapping some of that depth could get them the latter.

The returns would be swift and strong. The Bank would sell out every night again.

Trout would become the biggest athlete in Philadelphia since Allen Iverson took the Phils to the NBA Finals. And does anybody doubt he has the stones to handle it?

It's a pipe dream I realize.

But summer and baseball are what dreams are all about.

The Man Who Wouldn't Be President

If Hillary Clinton does not win this thing, she will fail to become the first woman to be president. She will also become one of the more accomplished candidates -- male or female -- to fall short of the presidency.

Her 20-year resume is unrivaled among the current candidates: First Lady for eight years, U.S. Senator for eight more, and Secretary of State for four years.

But where does she stand in U.S. history? Has anyone with more impressive credentials sought and failed in multiple attempts to be president?

The answer is yes and most definitely yes.

Henry Clay is arguably the most impressive American politician never to be president. A lion of the U.S. Senate, Clay also served multiple stints as Speaker of the House and also as Secretary of State.

A lawyer and highly skilled orator, the Kentuckian negotiated some of the most famous legislative compromises of the pre-Civil War 19th century. From 1811 to 1850, few major events happened in American politics without Clay's input.

If ever a person seemed destined to be president, it was Clay. And he wanted it very badly. But Clay ran three times -- in 1824, 1832 and 1844 -- and lost each time.

I haven't read any biographies of Clay, but recently read several biographies of the men who served with him and bested him. Sometimes that can give a better read on a person.

He made one major miscalculation, otherwise, Clay was bedeviled by circumstances. Simply put, if it weren't for bad luck, he'd have had no luck at all.

"I am the most unfortunate man in the history of parties," he reportedly said after the Whigs bypassed him for the elderly William Henry Harrison in 1840.

The 1840 contest represented Clay's best chance at the presidency. President Martin Van Buren was on the ropes due to the Panic of 1837. Inexplicably, the Whigs settled on the 67-year-old Harrison, who won and died one month into his term.

But the President Clay plan went off the rails much earlier. In hindsight, it's fascinating to consider just how close Clay came to becoming not just a POTUS, but possibly an all-time legendary American figure.

By 1824, the 47-year-old Clay was an established power in Washington, D.C. He was elected freshman Speaker of the House in 1811 and used his forceful personality to remake the largely ceremonial position into the powerful post it remains to this day.

One anecdote tells the story: in one of his first acts as speaker, Clay banned Rep. John Randolph's dog from the House. Members feared the prickly and pugnacious Randolph and Clay was the first who dared confront him on the issue.

Fast forward to 1824 and Clay's plan seemed sound. In a four-man field -- Andrew Jackson, John Quincy Adams and William H. Crawford were the others -- Clay rightly assumed that none of the four would get the required number of electoral votes.

In that scenario, the 12th amendment calls for the House of Representatives to choose the president. Clay needed only to finish in the top three in electoral votes and then let his House influence do the work from there. He finished fourth.

It is likely that, at 47, he was viewed as too young by the standards of 1824 America. What Clay did next would burden him politically for the rest of his life.

In his defense, Clay only did what he did best: he struck a deal. As the three candidates fished for support in the House, sectional loyalties led to gridlock. Already a foe of Jackson's, Clay held a lengthy meeting with Adams one evening.

Soon after, Clay delivered the votes of the three states he won -- Ohio, Missouri and Kentucky -- to Adams. Five days later, the new president named Clay as his secretary of state.

The Jacksonians howled about the "corrupt bargain." For all his gifts, Clay was an intractable sort and no match for the Jackson touch. Clay's political compass failed him one last time during the 1844 campaign, when he vexed many by opposing annexation of Texas.

By this time infirmed and nearing death, Jackson smugly observed that his old adversary was "a dead political duck."

There are many similarities between Henry C. and Hillary C. Both were and are skilled Washington insiders who chased power their entire lives and lusted after the presidency.

Clinton hopes to write a different ending.

Inside Baseball: On to Cincinnati!

When the Phillies play their first game in Cincinnati April 4, they will be tied for first place.

It's the closest to contention they will get all season. With that in mind, the most urgent business on skipper Pete Mackanin's to-do list seems to be deciding an opening-day starter.

In one corner, we have Aaron Nola, acknowledged by all to be the most talented pitcher in the organization. In the other, we have everyone else.

The latter group includes Charlie Morton, and I think he should get the ball April 4. Is he better than Nola? No. Jerad Eickhoff and Jeremy Hellickson might be a better, too.

But Morton doesn't have to be the best pitcher to fill the role I think they have in mind for him.

For sure, Morton was brought on because the Phils needed a starter and he was available for nothing. The Pirates were more than happy to offload his $8 million 2016 salary.

At 32, Morton is what I'll call a "young veteran." He's been around for a long time, but he's only thrown 875 innings.

The rest of the 2016 starts will go to Nola, 22, Eickhoff, 25, Hellickson, 29, Vincent Velasquez, 23, Brett Oberholtzer, 26, Jake Thompson, 22, Mark Appel, 24, and Adam Morgan, 25.

Many of these names show up on various prospect lists. Yes, the Phillies are young and talented, with a bright future -- emphasis on young.

I believe Phillies chief Andy MacPhail looked across town and saw the young 76ers wandering aimlessly through loss after loss. After stumbling through an embarassing couple of months, the Sixers talked Elton Brand out of retirement to babysit the striplings.

Morton as coach on the field is not a crazy thought. In a largely anonymous career to date, he's made minor news a few times. Once for mimicking the legendary Roy Halladay's delivery. Hopefully, he adopted Doc's work ethic as well.

But the thing that stood out to me is Morton's fondness for pitching inside. Nobody in baseball hits more batters than Charlie Morton, one per 11.2 innings. He led the National League in hit batters in 2013 and 2014, despite missing more than half a season's worth of starts over the two years.
 
The point, of course, is not to bean anyone. All that does is add another baserunner. What it tells us is Morton is fearless about pitching inside.

I see a lot of young pitchers seemingly afraid to throw inside. Or maybe they don't know how. The end result is giving up half of the plate, and it makes the hitter's job a lot easier.

"Pitching is the art of instilling fear," Hall of Famer Sandy Koufax said. In another interview, he was more blunt: "Show me a guy who can't pitch inside and I'll show you a loser."

Harsh? Perhaps.

I probably saw all of Nola's Major League starts last year, and my recollection is he prefers staying away from hitters. The numbers back it up: he hit three batters in 165 minor-league innings.

Eickhoff and Thompson pitched a combined 117 innings in the Phillies' organization after coming over via trade last year. Neither recorded a hit batter.

Again, it's about pitching inside. Hitting batters is merely a byproduct of that skill. The Phillies have a stable of talented young pitchers, and they need to learn to become complete pitchers.

I believe Morton is here to serve as mentor, coach on the field and leader of the staff. Can he fill that role starting the second or third game of the year? Of course.

But I think the Phils will be all in on this, and they should be.

Obama's Jacksonian Legacy

"This vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president" -- Mitch McConnell

Barack Obama's presidency most reminds me of Andrew Jackson.

While it may seem illogical to compare anything about America's first black president with an avowed racist who smashed any abolitionist acts, there are similarities.

Above all, Jackson was a supreme political tactician. Despite his lack of formal education, few leaders have ever handled political opponents more deftly than The General.

And Jackson did not lack for quality opposition. Sens. Henry Clay and John Calhoun, as well as the brilliant Nicholas Biddle, were just three of his formidable foes.

Sen. Thomas Hart Benton is the Hillary Clinton in this analogy, an early adversary who quickly learned the political value of not holding grudges.

The former trio never overcame their stubborn opposition, and Jackson made them pay at every turn. His proficiency in trouncing Clay and Calhoun forms much of Jackson's presidential legacy.

In battles over administration appointments, nullification and the national bank, Jackson bested opponents via a series of shrewd moves. Opponents were left to claim Jackson desired to be king of his kingdom.

For a nation just a generation or two removed from the abuses of King George III, the charge was a serious one.

These days, Obama's serially vanguished opponents claim he "wants to act as if he's a dictator," as Gov. Chris Christie said recently. Dictator is the new king, apparently.

The modern-day roles of Clay and Calhoun are filled by Sen. Mitch McConnell and former Speaker John Boehner. McConnell even hails from Kentucky, the state where Clay held sway. Like Calhoun, the first vice president to resign, Boehner also gave up a power post after losing several confrontations with the White House.

McConnell welcomed the Obama presidency thusly: "My number one priority is making sure President Obama's a one-term president."

That didn't work out so well. Through healthcare, gay marriage, government shutdowns and elections, Obama seemingly emerges stronger each time.

And that brings America to the final epic showdown over the Supreme Court. Republicans would do well to stop underestimating their opponent.

Or at least set their expectations low. The Washington Post has already theorized that even if Republicans succeed in batting the nomination forward, Obama wins anyway.

The Jackson years ended with one final battle to erase an early Senate censure from the record. In the ensuing debate, Clay, Calhoun and Benton gave fiery speeches for and against as all recognized the historical importance of a final fight that closed an era.

Even as Calhoun spoke in oratory fury, Jon Meacham writes in "American Lion," "like Clay ... he knew that his was a futile argument."

Will McConnell & Co. recognize the same?

Time to Bern? Not likely

Relax Right America, Bernie Sanders isn't going to be president.

His time is going to run out, much like it did for William Lloyd Garrison and Lucy Stone. The former was an early abolitionist, while the latter led the women's suffrage movement.

History will remember Sanders, too, once the United States completes its transformation to a complete social welfare democracy. Yes, it's inevitable.

If you're scoffing at this point, please consider the history of the American psyche. We are progressive, as all humans are. But we are the scared, suspicious, white-knuckle-freedom-clinging kind of progressive.

And that usually means the rest of the free world is likely to evolve long before we do. We like to scuffle over an issue for a few decades before we grudgingly give change a try.

Consider slavery. By the time Lincoln issued the Emanicpation Proclaimation, we were one of the last first-world civilizations still sanctioning the foul practice. It took decades, and the loss of 620,000 lives, for Americans to overcome their deep fear of change and renounce slavery.

Consider Social Security. Signed into law by FDR in 1935, the U.S. program trailed many European nations by 30-40 years. The need had existed for much longer. American ex-presidents Madison, Jefferson and Monroe all died penniless, or in significant debt, in 1825 and 1833. One can imagine how ordinary elderly citizens (if they lived that long) suffered through their final years throughout the 19th century.

Still, it would take another century and a calamitous depression to produce an old-age pensioners program. And it wasn't exactly hailed by all either. Another two-year battle would rage before the U.S. Supreme Court sided with Roosevelt and Social Security began.

Not before Sen. Alf Landon voiced the specious fears of the change-haters: "It will impose a crushing burden on industry and labor [and] establish a bureaucracy in the field of insurance in competition with private business."

Yeah, about that...

So that brings us to the current issues of health insurance and gun control. On both, we are once again trailing every significant country in the world. We are much further along on the former than the latter, but it will take some time yet before we get to the single-payer system that is all but inevitable.

The concept of President Sanders will move the boulder a few meters up the hill. But there's still too many right-winging, bitter-clinging, proud clingers out there to make it a viable option in the foreseeable future. 

Those folks will again mask their fear of change in references to the Founding Fathers and "limited government." 

In reality, those Fathers (minus Jefferson) recognized fairly quickly that there are things a strong central government can do better than the private sector. Adams, Washington, Madison and others endorsed hasty changes to give the government power to make treaties, levy taxes and build roads.

Washington sought to crush a rebellion similar to the nonsense in Oregon.

So no, Bernie isn't going to be president. But get used to his ideas. He's giving you a glimpse into the future.

My Favorite Seinfeld Moments

Not everyone gets Seinfeld -- and that's not a bad thing. It was a quirky bit of nothingness that blazed across our TV screens like a Tony Danza workout video.

And then sitcoms returned to doing what sitcoms do, with a few more cameras and a bit of multi-plot storytelling thrown in.

Seinfeld was an original. It remains TV's most original comedy. As such, the list of memorable scenes is rather lengthy.

Bill Wolfe won't agree, but these are my top five. All are Kenny Bania-approved. Giddyup!

1. He took ... It out.

I love this scene because it involves all four characters and they all have hilarious turns at the material. And let's be honest -- it's a great concept and a great line. Anybody that you can't immediately bond with over a "He took it out" quip isn't a true Seinfeldian.

This is quite simply a masterpiece of comic genius from JLD. Julia owns the scene from start to finish. In fact, if she were to expire tomorrow and need a one-minute audition tape to get into comedy heaven, this is all she needs.

My favorite part is Elaine fogging up her glasses in the middle of the money line.

"He took (blows on glasses) it out."

Now Jerry is a comedian and not an actor. But as he often did, he raises his game here. I never felt Seinfeld was acting in these scenes. He's just a funny guy riffing with a funny girl.

"So you're talking, having a pleasant conversation, and all of a sudden..."

"It."

"It."

"Out."

"Out."

Throughout this marvelous exchange, Julia delivers several clever comebacks in modulated tones. Then Kramer enters and, unlike Jerry, needs no explanation at all.

"Well, maybe it needed air. It can't breathe in there!"

The topic is on such a wonderful roll, it continues in the ensuing scene -- with Jerry recounting the events for George. And George gets his great line.

"I spend so much time trying to get their clothes off, I never thought about taking mine off."

2. The Opposite.

This is here because "The Opposite" is my Seinfeld nirvana. Larry David and Jerry at their Mt. Everest of nothingness. I picture Larry coming up with this premise and then writing the entire episode in 20 minutes. It practically writes itself.

The story arc is perfect Seinfeld quirkiness: the ever pessimistic, neurotic George concocting a scheme to reverse his lifetime curse by simply ignoring his base instincts.

This is Jason Alexander's tour de force. There are so many great lines ("Why shave every day; It just grows back") and scenes here that I want to just list the entire episode. But to narrow it down to one scene leaves only one choice: the opening.

To watch George seize on this wackadoodle idea is hysterical. Of course, Jerry is there to do what Jerry always does to his pal, that is, egg him on. Elaine provides wonderful nonverbal reactions that keep the scene moving along nicely.

It all ends up at the usual place -- comic gold -- as George approaches a woman at the coffee shop, something he would never do.

"My name is George. I'm unemployed and I live with my parents."

"I'm Victoria. (big smile) Hi."

What makes the episode and scene work so marvelously is how George's crazy idea is actually quite sensible. We believe what we are seeing because we know the secret George doesn't know. That his belief in this hairbrained scheme has given him a belief in himself. He has confidence and that is why he gets the girl, and a job with the New York Yankees.

Of course, George doesn't see it. He wouldn't be George if he did, right?

3. She's Bald!

Another ensemble piece with everybody chipping in. This one is here because (obviously) it's a very funny scene. But it's also a landmark moment in the series, the scene where George's unending obsession with his baldness reaches its pinnacle.

But first, a comment on the writing. Superb as usual. One reason I give few sitcoms a chance is the lame writing. I know it is a lot more difficult than it seems, but if I can guess your lame punch lines in my head, then I'm not going to watch.

Few shows can write lines like this: "Let me tell you something. No one walks into a beauty parlor and says 'Give me the Larry Fine.'"

The scene rachets up when Elaine calls George out for his shameless hypocrisy.

"You're rejecting somebody because they're bald."

"So?"

You're bald!"

Elaine is a classic sassy broad and she's having none of George's bullshit. The confrontation is just what George needs to deal with the bald issue once and for all and go on to a happy life. Well, not necessarily happy, per se, but he's back to being George.

"You're like a bald again," Jerry quips.

4. Worlds collide.

This was a tough one between worlds collide and "we're not men." This is from our Seinfeld for Singles collection. Single men, that is.

Let's face it, Seinfled is a guy's show. The majority of characters, regular and recurring, were male. Even Elaine is the type of gal who is more likely to have guy friends than girlfriends.

 As a guy's show, the Seinfelders covered relationship issues mainly from a guy's perspective. Not that there's anything wrong with that. Whenever I see the episode with Marcy yada yadaing sex, I think "a guy wrote that line." Doesn't make it any less funny.

The world's collide concept once again puts George in the lead. Guys recognize this as one of those quirky concepts that make perfect sense to us. But only Seinfeld would tackle it in a TV show.

It's out of character for Jerry not to know the worlds concept, but necessary for plot purposes. George's impassioned explanation is what makes this scene memorable. Scenes like this won Jason regular Emmy nominations.

"If Relationship George walks through that door, he will kill Independent George! A George divided against itself cannot stand!"

"It's all just slippin' away... and you're lettin' it happen!"

5. Super Bowl sex romp.

The last spot is the hardest and this is the third time I am rewriting this section. "The Marine Biologist" (my second-favorite episode) was initially here, then I considered terrific scenes from "The Contest" and "The Pilot."

In the end, I could not leave off what I consider possibly the greatest single line in Seinfeld history. You know the one:

"I don't trust this guy. I think he regifted, and then he de-gifted, and now he's using an upstairs invite as a springboard to a Super Bowl sex romp."

This is Seinfeld in one sentence -- why people either love it or hate it. I get that some people find it a little too smart-alecky, but those of us who love it, love it for the clever originality.

It was never banal. It was never trite. And I doubt we'll ever see anything like it again.

Adams and Jefferson

David MCCullough's famed biography "John Adams" should really be called "Adams and Jefferson" since it is very much dominated by their relationship.

Understandably so as they were linked for decades, bound by respect, divided by differences. In a timeline that is well known, Adams and Jefferson ceased speaking for many years before Benjamin Rush nudged the pair toward a reconcilliation.

Their ensuing correspondance that filled their retirement years with a delightful exchange of ideas.

I have not seen the miniseries based on McCullough's book, but it rightly raised Adams' profile. Past presidents are frequently judged and rejudged, with their grades adjusted accordingly.

After reading the book, I don't think Adams gets enough credit as a great man. No doubt his foibles did him no favors. He was at various times a petty, vain sourpuss who was quite simply high maintenance.

His counfounding decision to sign the Alien and Sedition Acts confirmed his leading role in one of the most embarassing laws in U.S. history.

But there is far more good than bad. Adams was a man of impeccable character. His character and integrity were of legendary standard. As a young lawyer, he defended British officers knowing it would make him highly unpopular.

Adams did extraordinary work in Paris and London during the 1780s. His diplomacy was crucial for the young nation in a time of need.

As a vice president, Adams had little to do for two terms. But when he ascended to the presidency, war with France seemed inevitable. Much of the nation was torn, with pro-French passions high.

It was here that Adams showed his considerable intellect, diplomacy and political skill in keeping the young country out of what surely would have been a devastating war. At one point, Adams wrote an amazing letter to Congress reversing an earlier position on sending ministers to France.

It was a courageous act, one that made him scorn from supporters and ridicule from opponents. But it was the right move for the country.

Adams later appointed the great John Marshall to the Supreme Court, a monumental move. These wins should burnish the reputation of a great president, and while scholars generally give Adams good marks, his legacy seems more meh.

No doubt the man himself deserves blame for this. He did things like leaving town at 4 a.m. the day of Jefferson's inaugural. That is not a good look. Adams was definitely a mercurial man.

But he was also a great president.

George Washington

I am in a few weeks into a project to read bios of all 44 U.S. presidents. After a detour to read a pair of excellent Theodore Roosevelt books, I started at the beginning with George Washington.

I am now up to Lynne Cheney's 2012 bio of James Madison and I wanted to jot down a few thoughts before they escape me. It is fascinating to look back on our infant nation and the astonishing ways things were so different and yet very much the same.

Let me explain. The differences resulted primarily from lack of precedence and the technology of the time. Still, these things are interesting in hindsight. For example, Thomas Jefferson didn't learn until months later that he had been appointed secretary of state by Washington.

Some behaviors have changed greatly, too. In the 18th century, to show ambition for public office was considered a faux pas. So great men like John Adams were required to wait to be asked to serve.

And the presidential timelines were seriocomical. Washington decided a few weeks before the fall election to accept a second term. The evolution of competitive presidential campaigns with Adams v. Jefferson in 1796 is interesting to review.

The ways things remain unchanged is equally fascinating. We are an interesting people, and our groupthink response to Syrian refugees, for example, echoes our earliest American ancestors.

In 1798, Adams signed the Alien and Sedition Acts, an unfortunate set of laws in response to the pressing French crisis. The former gave the president the authority to immediately expel any French-American suspected of conspiring against America.

Sound familiar? It's worth noting that Adams never expelled anyone, and it's highly likely no Syrian refugees will turn up as future terrorists. Seems probable that a better study of history might elicit a better response.

More thoughts on Washington:

1. Washington: He's been called the perfect man for the time, and it's hard to argue with those sentiments. The patience and foresight exhibitied by President Washington is remarkable. He had a special ability to elicit not just respect, but devotion from those around him, strangers and confidantes alike.
We recognize this as leadership, of course, but Washington had something more. His compassion and integrity (and probably his physical stature) made women want to be with him, and men want to be like him.
While he enjoyed a honeymoon of sorts during his first term, Washington frequently found himself between Federalists and Republicans during his second term. He was attacked by the press, and more often, from his own double-dealing cabinet officials.
Washington almost never responded, an incredible display of discipline and probity that carried him calmly through the fiercest of political crisises. It turned out to be a vital display of courage in leadership for a young nation that, despite winning independence in 1783, was under almost continuous threat of attack for the next several decades.
Washington's extraordinary heroism and leadership extended to his deathbed, where he kept a team of the best doctors informed on his progress ("It won't be long now") and instructed a trusted aide to delay burial until "three hours after death." The old general was concerned he'd be buried alive.

Those F***ing Signs!

One thing I admire about Bruce the person is his unique ability to remain true to his roots despite becoming one of the most famous artists in the world.
And that's not some line from his PR bio either.
During the 1990s, Bruce was known for taking to the streets of Freehold, N.J. to watch parades, a little Springsteen on his shoulders. Yet another small-town parent watching a parade, just one who happened to sell 120 million albums worldwide.
In "Bruce," Peter Ames Carlin writes of Springsteen riding his Harley through rural Jersey when he happened upon a couple dudes bullshitting over a motorcycle. Bruce pulled up and joined the conversation, eventually ending up in the stranger's backyard tossing back a Budweiser.
I will never interview Bruce, unless he starts selling insurance, but I did talk to a Mechanicsburg woman who did interior design for the singer. Carol Kemery said The Boss was a wonderful boss, and totally down to earth.
Oh, about my headline. One thing younger Bruce did not like about his public: "Those fucking signs" that popped up during his shows. In a tradition (one Bruce has made peace with), fans display signs of songs they want to hear.
Here's numbers 7-12 on my Boss List:

7. "The River." It took me a long time to warm up to title track to album No. 5. I've come to consider it, accurately or not, the last of Bruce's epic story songs. Most of his post-River work is shorter, uptempo rockers mixed with the occassional social justice song.
"The River" is a bit unbalanced to me. The first two verses are shorter and good, but the third verse is a big one, and tremendous writing. The music matches the dichotomy of quality. It's not that the first half of the song is bad, more that the second half is so terrific.
Of course, the story of "The River" origin is well known. Bruce's sister Ginny is the protagonist here, and supposedly heard the song for the first time at a sold-out show at Madison Square Garden in 1979. Despite the tough circumstances Ginny and Mickey went through, the real-life couple remains married.

Video: The song.
Favorite line: "Is a dream a lie if it don't come true, or is it something worse?"
Instrumental highlight: Bruce pulls out the harmonica
Quibble: Bit of a downer, even for Bruce

8. "Backstreets." This is a big-time, powerful rock-and-roll song. This time, the extended instrumental brilliance comes at the beginning, as Roy Bittan plays the piano and organ to set the stage. Bruce sings of summer adventures, this time with "Terry," which has led to some speculation over the gender of the main character.
Bruce's vocals are mixed deep into the music. Overall it's a different sound, I guess representative of Ronnie Specter's "Wall of Sound" recording method. It all gives "Backstreets" a big, booming effect.
I feel this is the one major song in the Bruce collection that I have much more to learn about.

Video: The song.
Favorite line: "Remember all the movies, Terry, we'd go see. Trying to learn to walk like the heroes, we thought we had to be."
Instrumental highlight: Bittan delivers his best piano work here
Quibble: The mix buries some of the lyrics

9. "Independence Day." Probably too unsubstantial to be credibly ranked ahead of some of the powerhouse songs that follow, but this is my damn list. Fathers and sons will forever be fraught with complications and the themes here are meaningful to me.
The song is a simple message from son to father sung over slow piano, with minor acoustic guitar and drum parts. The mounrful sax solo is terrific. Bruce again delivers a semi-spoken part that mixes things up.

Video: The song.
Favorite line: "There was just no way this house could hold the two of us. I guess that we were just too much of a same kind."
Instrumental highlight: The Big Man's sax solo
Quibble: Bruce's vocals are oddly cheery given the subject material. Probably not a quibble, but noteworthy.

10. "Atlantic City." With its plaintative harmonica, haunting background vocals and vivid lyrics sung in slightly desperate tone, "Atlantic City" captures the seedy underbelly of a seedy city.
This is some of Bruce's best and original writing. In a rarity, Bruce sings the first-person character rather than assigning him a name. A young man with a girl, he is trying to go straight, but he's "been looking for a job but it's hard to find." And well, he's "just tired of comin' out on the losin' end."
The chorus -- "Put your makeup on and fix your hair up pretty and meet me tonight in Atlantic City" -- certainly has a few different meanings. The young man wants his girl to think they can make it. Maybe he's trying to convince himself, too.

Video: The song.
Favorite line: "Down here it's just winners and losers and don't get caught on the wrong side of that line."
Instrumental highlight: Bruce's harmonica
Quibble: Probably not a tune you want to bust out at a party

11. "The Promised Land."
The dogs on Main Street howl
'cause they understand
If I could take one moment into my hands
Mister, I ain't a boy
No, I'm a man
And I believe in a Promised Land.

One of the more accessible, singalong songs in the entire Bruce catalogue, when "The Promised Land" re-appears in my CD player, it gets repeated over and over.
There's been much discussion among Bruce fans over what exactly constitutes "The Promised Land." The song lyrics accurately describe the soul-crushing existence of life on the fringe, while the chorus urges hope in an American ideal. Is it the American Dream? Love of family? Redemption? Religion? Bruce touches on all, but never exactly reveals.
Maybe the Promised Land is where we find it.

Video: The song.
Favorite line: "Blow away the dreams that tear you apart. Blow away the dreams that break your heart."
Instrumental highlight: Bruce's harmonica. Again
Quibble: Nothing. I love this song.

12. The Promise. Yet another Bruce tale on wrestling with life's demons while trying to find some self-love and happiness. And another song with two versions -- I prefer the stripped down arrangement found on "18 Tracks."
This is a somber song, yet accessible, about childhood friends, with vague hints of betrayal. Supposedly it was written about Bruce's split with original manager Mike Appel. The lyrics are extraordinary ("When the promise is broken, you go on livin', but it steals something from down in your soul.") and give hints to the Appel lawsuit without being overbearing about it. For example, the chorus refers to "Thunder road" and the song ends with "take it all, and throw it all away."

Video: The song.
Favorite line: "I lived a secret I should've kept to myself, but I got drunk one night and I told it."
Instrumental highlight: Bittan's piano accompanies the song
Quibble: Somber and artsy.