Blog Whore
Parallel Races?
Tue, May 6, 2008 - 12:57 PM
* * *
Only 39 fillies have ever entered the Kentucky Derby in 134 years, and only 3 have ever come in first. I distinctly remember a soundbyte last week from Hilary Clinton saying "she was putting her money on the filly." Unfortunately, that was a win and a loss...a very sad loss.
Tragic. And ironic. Omen of the race to come?
Tue, May 6, 2008 - 12:57 PM -
permalink -
10 Comments
10 Comments |
add a comment |
|
Tue, May 6, 2008 - 1:29 PM
Not sure about an omen for the race to come...but,
I gots a problem with horse racing. Not so much that they do it, but at what age the horses are when they race them. Ya see, my family used to have horses...my step mom would not let someone sit on a horse until the horse was 4 years old. They are still growing....if you race a horse when they are too young you risk this sort of pain and damage to the horse simply because their bones are not strong enough to handle it. They may be faster at that young age, but they are more brittle...horses should be older when you race them. |
|
Tue, May 6, 2008 - 3:48 PM
If you're drawing a parallel to the Democratic race, I would say there is more of a risk that it is the winner--not the second-place finisher--will be hopelessly crippled when it is over.
However, I believe that risk is greatly overblown. People are nervous right now because while Hillary and Barack continue to slug it out, John "I'm That Guy Who Used to Have Integrity" McCain travels around the country raising money and taking pot shots at them. This has naturally led to a little bump up in the polls since he is effectively running without opposition for the moment. Once the eventual Democratic nominee is able to turn attention to Mr. McCain--along with superior resources--and respond in kind, he will not have such a happy time of it. It's a long time between now and November--six months is an eternity in politics, and certainly enough time to give the country a pretty good education on McCain's activities during the Bush years, and his far-right stances on most issues. |
|
Tue, May 6, 2008 - 4:59 PM
Actually I was seeing the parallel more with the female second runner (Hilary/Eight Belles) being crippled, not because she came in second, but because she wasn't old enough/experienced enough/tough enough to endure the *outcome* of the race. Obviously she was capable of winning it (and perhaps she would have under other circumstances), but look what happened to her after she crossed over the finish line... crippled and put down. Plus it's just funny that the first place winner is named "Big Brown".
|
|
Tue, May 6, 2008 - 5:15 PM
And also, I have to wonder what will happen to Hilary and her ambitions if she does lose the nomination. It will mean she came in second place, but that's not a second place you get any prize for. She'll go back to being a senator, but will her political ambitions be essentially squashed for future elections? Maybe she could pull it together and run again in 2012 or 2016...but look at what happened to Gore. He actually WON THE POPULAR VOTE for president, and he didn't take a second stab at when election year came back around. I think if she loses, this may be it for her.
But hey, who knows what the future holds. |
|
Tue, May 6, 2008 - 6:06 PM
Predictions, if she loses the race for the nomination:
1. After an Obama VICTORY in the general election: Hillary becomes Majority Leader of the United States Senate. You're right, there's no second place (except in the unlikely effect she's offered the VP slot which she would be wise to turn down). But her profile has been raised immensely by the process and she has received millions of votes, which makes her the logical choice to lead the Senate. 2. After an Obama DEFEAT in the general election: Hillary runs for President again in 2012 and wins. Should Obama lose, McCain as an aging hard-right conservative in the White House would be unlikely to offer the kind of fundamental change the country needs, meaning he'd either run again as an unpopular incumbent or give it up to another GOP candidate who also be hobbled by McCain's unpopularity. Disclaimer: Obama DEFEAT, followed by Vice Presidential succession to finish out McCain's term: all bets are off! |
|
Tue, May 6, 2008 - 6:56 PM
I was born in Louisville, Kentucky.
I come from a family of horse people, but it's on my British side. The equestrians in my family do dressage and jumping, but no racing. I learned to ride both English and Western style, but both are pretty mellow and allow the horse to find its own pace. The horses my Aunt Sally keeps get to live a long life being groomed meticulously and loved much, and when they are done competing, they are great for teaching young children to ride. Such a shame - such a waste. And such disrespect. |
|
Wed, May 7, 2008 - 9:51 AM
I think the problem with Thoroughbred racing is right there in the name. Thoroughbred. I have a problem with dog breeders doing this, and it's clearly a problem with racing, too. Her legs were clearly too brittle, not strong enough, whatever. It was bred into her. She is a creation of a system that values her only as a quantity. Ultimately the problem is in the science. She was bred to be fast, the product of two horses that were undoubtedly fast and who were in turn the products of more horses that were themselves bred to be fast. Great. They're fast. So what? As scientists and biologists have shown us (those who care to pay attention) over and over again, without genetic diversity, a species cannot survive. Inbreeding happens all the time in these smaller groups of animals where mates are not chosen by the animals themselves but by people who are looking to refine specific qualities in future generations. If we did this with our children, imagine the kind of population we'd have?
Genetic diversity. Get some today. |
|
Wed, May 7, 2008 - 9:56 AM
As I told someone else, I care a lot more that Filly than any of the candidates... though I'm warming to Obama. :)
|
|
Wed, May 7, 2008 - 10:30 AM
I was going to refrain from commenting on the horse racing industry here, but since y'all mentioned it...
Disclaimer: these opinions are entirely my own, and will be viewed as extreme and I don't care. Horse racing is WRONG, thoroughbred or otherwise. Any kind of animal racing is wrong. Its just a step away from dog or cock fighting. Animals are being bred, abused, overworked and slaughtered for profit and entertainment. www.chai-online.org/en/compa...acing.htm www.equineadvocates.com/hs/bin.html horseracing.about.com/od/book...1405.htm Surely we can find other, respectful and compassionate forms of entertainment in the 21st century. It is sickening what we do to the rest of Nature in the interest of human entertainment and profit...sickening. |
|
Wed, May 7, 2008 - 2:53 PM
What a shame and a waste! I'll agree with the sentiment... I've always held to Reverend's opinion about riding (let alone racing) at such an age. Ditto for comments on genetics. I'm a horse person through and through... and it sickens me.
There is also another very negative side to racing - the Jockeys. My first husband exercised horses at the track, and his younger brother did as well. Older brother was a jockey. They take worse care of themselves than a starved super-model, using diuretics and laxatives like recreational drugs... and then chasing them with plenty of those too, particularly cocaine & various other forms of amphetamine. Bad for the animals... bad for the people. Ahm just sayin'. |
