Signing Naturally 11.1 Answers
Mario Davis
Davis signed a one-year contract two days before training camp started, an addition that could prove to be just as significant as signing defensive lineman Ndamukong Suh and trading for cornerbacks Aqib Talib and Marcus Peters.
Davis' intuition was right on, and he has found himself working extensively with the starting defense as an outside linebacker during the first three weeks of training camp. Coach Sean McVay has frequently identified Davis as one of the early standouts, though the praise apparently has not filtered down to the seven-season veteran who last played for Buffalo.
"I'm not looking for any kind of cheers or pat on the back from the coaches, but if they are fans of me, then obviously that's a good thing," Davis said. "My thing is going out there and not letting the guys down next to me. Just giving it my best and playing hard."
The quick transition Davis has made at outside linebacker is all the more important because the Rams must replace both starters there after trading Robert Quinn to Miami in March and not re-signing free agent Connor Barwin.
Quinn and Barwin combined for 13.5 sacks last season. Davis has flashed pass-rush ability with 14 career sacks, including 6 1/2 in 2014 for Jacksonville. Getting to the quarterback has always come naturally for Davis, but he is adjusting well to the coverage responsibilities of his new position. Recruited to Bethune-Cookman University as a tight end before moving to defense, Davis showed he still has soft hands during a post-practice session Saturday night catching balls from a JUGS machine.
Instead, the biggest change for Davis has been rebuilding his body to handle the athletic demands of playing outside linebacker. He reported to training camp at 280 pounds, which was fine by the Rams, but it quickly became evident to Davis that he had to drop weight.
"They liked the way I moved when I came in," Davis said. "I came in and ran (the conditioning test) perfectly fine and was moving around perfectly fine, but for me personally I knew I have to shed weight to be able to keep this up the whole year. I'm down 10 pounds already from the start of camp and I'm looking to lose another 10, 15."
"I know I had to switch over to Sam linebacker, but that's really why I came. The defense, the Wade Phillips defense is a good fit," Davis said. "I've been talking with the Rams the whole offseason. We kind of sensed that this is where I wanted to be, and we went back and forth about everything, but I was just glad to be here. The Rams, LA just made a ton of sense for me as a player. The atmosphere, the city, everything about it just felt right."
The article by Anna Quindlen in NEWSWEEK has explicitly raised the so-called age issue. Now that Senator McCain is the presumptive Republican Party nominee I suspect we will hear more discussion. Discussion of age is most likely a proxy for a very important discussion we should be having -- the concern raised by age is mental and physical health. The candidates should disclose their health records and the press should examine them closely.
What would have to be done to prevent a President being able to use "signing statements" that end up subverting the intentions of whatever bill is being signed? It seems to me that this must somehow be unconstitutional, or at the very least, "approved lying."
Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA) is supporting legislation that would give standing to Congress to go to court and challenge a President's exception taking to signed legislation. Justice Talking (an Annenberg Public Policy Center NPR program) did a fine program on signing statements. You can hear it by going to the Justice Talking Web site.
I'm interested in the issue of executive letters - I believe that's the instrument that Bush used several times to extend Presidential powers; but I don't think that the candidates are saying how they will rescind/correct them?
Do you think more journalists should be talking about the Constitutional implications of bringing the Clintons back in the White House - not necessarily against the law, but perhaps against the spirit of the law?
On Constitutional implications. As you know, there is no Constitutional ban on people from the same family serving as President. As a campaign issue it is expressed in Senator Obama's call to "turn the page" and in Senator Clinton's statement that it took a Clinton to clean up the mess made by the first President Bush.
Great show! Ms. Jamieson was wonderful. It was such a relief to watch political conversation without all the bias. Our media has taken such a partisan and biased role in reporting about the election that our leaders are no longer selected by the people but through the media. Why can't the American public see through this? What is wrong with us? Are we that easily persuaded? How do we get people to see through the fog that is being created?
We all have a tendency to seek out information compatible with our own views. We apply stricter tests of evidence to information inconsistent with those views. And we are very good at detecting biases that run against our views but consider biases that favor them an objective accurate reflection of reality. So it is unsurprising that people are more likely to read watch and listen to media that reinforce their own ideology.
I recently came across your post and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I don't know what to say except that it caught my interest and you've provided informative points. I will visit this blog often. Thank you.
Sir Vertual and Billy Bob seem obsessed with derailing Obama. Hillary and McCain are no more qualified unless one is wed to Wall Street and the Congressional-Military-Industrial Conspiracy. Hillary is at best an "Evita" who insults the aspirations of better qualified women lacking her sordid connections. McCain is not only belligerant and senile, but has a history of corrupt collusion. Some like Hillary because she is "baby boomer correct."
But then Sir... and Billy.. are also correct that Obama is inexperienced and, well, "wishy-washy."
Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman had about as bad a history as Hillary and Obama when they came to federal office. One was an insider elitist cripple and the other a corrupt machine aparatchnik. Obama is about all the corporate media and big business will let the people have, and, as Hillary has said, he ain't out of the woods yet when it comes to rabbit hunters in covert employ.
Just vote for Obama, you dumbasses, and quit wishing for caviar. He's political fast food but the burden of civil nutrition is now in the people's kitchen. Ten million of us need to show up at the Inauguration January 20th (whomever Diebold elects) and show the world how to make stone soup. The "Little Red Hens" have empty cupboards and low gas tanks and the wolf is battering the door. It is too late to be finnicky, you damned backdoor racists! At least if we get a donkey we can lead it. I'm tired of monkeys at the wheel.
I am concerned (yet again) that we are making the wrong turns on a path that may very well lead to even further loss...Obama simly does not have the experience to be as effective as he ay want to be...however, I find it increasingly difficult to know what he really wants to achieve...It's become increasingly aparent that he'll say whatever is necessary to get votes...He's equated (that nutty) rev wright with his grandmother-out of one side of his face...which should have quelched his hope to further himself (even an extra day)in the primary...then within a few days, he's completely left the guy out in the rain as if he'd never seen him before, yet knew he was contageous with a fatal disease...Again, that action itself should have been an insight into how this guy operates...blacs have come out to vote in record numbers to lace votes for Obamma...simply because of his skin color , yet I've listened to numerous blacks who are extremely disappointed in the lack of support for Hillary by other blacks...Obama simply IS NOT ready for the office...nor can he deliver on even a small portion of the vague comments he's made...Although, I don't have the terrorized feeling I experienced after the Gore - jr debate 8 years ago...and i'm certainly no psychic...i don't have a very good feeling about this...I continue to think McCain's camp wants Obama to win the dem primary...They surely have a warehouse full of doubt evoking tricks, coments, histories and more that will flood every avenue as soon as he's locked in...Hillary is without question, the best choice right now...especially with Bill right there...Remember, HE DID FACE AN AWFUL NASTY PLATE FULL WHEN HE TOOK office after tha last bush (sr) fiasco and was able to turn us around....put this country back in the black in record time...and Hillary was right there...working for this country...Barack only won his 1st election 10 years ago...and it was under very cloudy skies....I justy think we're making a critical mistake here...at the most critical time...and my worst fear is that we'll be under another 4 years of a senile bush-a-like...I thkink we'd be safer with another actor in the white house versus a chameleon that can't act...
I would like to compliment Susan Mihalik for her comment on Ms. Jamison's outrageous claim that presidential candidates' medical and genetic histories should be required knowledge. I was totally aghast at this discriminatory and seemingly uneducated comment. In addition to the completely eugenic tone as brought up by Ms. Mihalik, Ms. Jamison's idea, when evaluated in a historical context, would probably have prevented genetically and physically "risky" individuals such as JFK, FDR, and Abraham Lincoln from assuming the presidency. The American public can't handle a president with some risks of illenss? What a ridiculous idea!
"I am writing with a concern that the picture you use to depict the election horserace has one of the horses leading the other. I think it is notable that the leading horse wears the red number, whereas the blue horse is behind.
This image makes me wonder if it belies the corporate interest in the outcome of the general election favoring the red team (Republican) candidate. I find this disturbing, coming from a major news source such as CBS.
I would recommend that you change this logo to represent an even match between the horses, or change the color scheme entirely. I object to the not-so-subtle bias that is conveyed in this highly visable image.
Thank you..."