Chile 3 Times, 3 Things about Chile...Tres y tres son Seis

In Spanish it is pronounced CHEE-LAY. Not like the hot pepper or the cool temperature "chilly" (CHILL-LEE). Of course, when speaking American English, it is perfectly acceptable to pronounce it that way. Only, if you think you are saying it the proper Spanish way, say it CHEE-LAY. Not half way , like CHILL- LAY or CHEE-LEE. Spanish is not that hard. It is not like trying to say China in Chinese (subject of another post).

Some people try to say Chile the right way but often get lazy or uninformed and it comes out half-cocked, which is a pet peeve of mine. Anyway, beyond the pronunciation of the place, there is the place itself. As long as we are talking about the same land called Chile, this long time neighbor of Argentina along the Pacific Coast, I wanted to give a primer/look at the country, the people: my perspective.

Because I have been there three times, each one provided unique opportunities to understand this part of the world. I feel like I have some special insight. And when understanding ourselves and the world we share, we might as well start somewhere. Why not the bottom of the world?

Not exactly Antarctica bottom of the world, but the Republic of Chile happens to lay claim to a large portion of that frozen continent as well, plus populates the Antarctic as much if not more than most other countries. Throw in the Easter Islands and Chile claims to a be a "Tri-continental" nation. At least that was what the radio purported back in 2005.

When I received a letter in the summer of 1989 that I would be a missionary for the length of two years in and around Concepcion, in south central Chile, I remember knowing about three things regarding this nation:

1. The capital is in the middle, Santiago. The Andes separate Chile from Argentina. They speak Spanish.

2. The musical artist Sting had a song about the widows and bereaved of those who died in the dictatorship of Pinochet, called They Dance Alone.

3. The movie Missing, featuring Jack Lemmon and Sissy Spacek, was about the family members of an American who disappears at the time of the military coup d'etat, and they fight to locate him. Sobering film.

Not a lot, really, but perhaps more than some.

I spent 22 months in the country (the first time), observing customs and quirks, lively lives and peculiar things, of course often painted by my Mormon lenses as a missionary. But first and foremost I am a human before any other label, and by and large I thoroughly enjoyed the experience. I felt like I learned a lot. Shared a lot. Lived a lot. Three observations?

1. I had close and constant contact with 9 different Chilean companions/partners for the majority of my mission. They were overall smart, kind, and good people. I benefited from knowing, serving and sharing with them. I also shared companionship time with other Americans doing their missions, and on shorter terms (we can call them splits or mini-exchanges) with other Chileans, which gave me differing points of view on the culture and its nuances. People that we got to know in and out of our faith were generally kind or even doting, which is a nice problem to have.

Miguel was energetic and zealous. Together more than two months. January to March, '90.
Manuel was smart, talented and dedicated. Together a month. April '90.
Andres was acerbic and wry. One month. April/May '90.
Pablo was funny and quiet, unassuming and a good artist. Two months. May-June '90.
Patricio was gentle but thoughtful. July-August '90
Milton was dedicated in his own way. September '90.
Sergio was smart, stubborn, a presence. October '90.
Marco was quiet but strong. March '91.
Juan was diminuitive in size but large in spirit. September-October '91.

2. There was poverty, but hunger was not a big problem. By the 1990s Chile was transitioning into the new democracy and post-General Pinochet economy under newly freely elected Patricio Aylwin, but there were obvious signs of the older less developed world of South America. But people seemed to have enough food. People were always offering me their food, rich, poor or "middle class". The economy has done better there. But they, like most places, still have a ways to go.

3. The people were looking to change. They knew, or many of them believed, that the past was not the answer. People saw our faith as a chance to move on, move up, move along.

Could I be more specific? Yes.

Should I expound on some of these thoughts?

More later.

Blog on...EMC.

If You Believe in God, Be Careful How You Talk

There are many people who believe in God; there are many different ways of honoring those beliefs. Perhaps as many there are people, or even as many as there are hours of the day! It can be hard to follow those beliefs, despite earnest faith, passion, care, loyalty or tradition towards those inner or outer practices and belief-systems. Some people and their respective faiths value the power and reverence of things uttered, either in prayer, song, sermon or simple communications between each others or oneself.

In my faith tradition, for example, we take care about "using the Lord's name in vain" because we think it is one of the ten commandments that is valid, a core tenet of how we try to live and behave.

All the commandments are important. Some are more difficult to qualify. It is certainly easier to measure "thou shalt not murder" as opposed to "honor thy father and thy mother".

Following the commandments is subjective.

When some people invoke the name or names of deity, they perhaps feel they are bringing themselves closer to those they nominally worship.

I and others take the other tack. Using the Lord's name in vain is to invoke a name without special meaning or significance. I would choose to show emotion or surprise by uttering "my goodness" rather than "my God".

"My God" would be more appropriate to utter in reverent tones of faith and appreciation, in times of faith and "witnessing". As some call it. We, in my faith system, call it "bearing testimony".

One thing that bothered me as a child and still can today are people who do not believe in certain Gods or divine characters and yet utter their names anyway. A friend named Jeremy comes to mind back in the 1970s and 80s; more recently a co-worker named James. They come to mind as egregious offenders of this principle, but I know in my own ways I can offend, too. But this is simply my point of view.

Be careful how you talk. Does "holy cow" offend Hindus? If so, I apologize and I will try not to say it around them. Not being a divine, but rather bovine being for me, then I will say it without trepidation.

Christian, Jewish, agnostic or atheist, we should be accountable for what names we utter, invoke, swear by.

Right?

I guess we can be over-sensitive, but it is worth serious reflection.

Blog on. EMC.

High School Dialogue

A few years ago (2011, I think) I wrote this imitation/satirical piece about the way some youth (and a few older folk) talk. When I taught at Pacific High School in San Bernardino, California, a lot of these sayings and phrases became etched in my mind. Some of it I had heard in the popular media in the years prior and since, but it is amazing to hear this from the real mouths of those we know and rub shoulders with. That was over 10 years ago, but I have stayed in pretty close contact with a lot of youth ever since. And I have been a foreign language linguist and English teacher a lot of my life, so this stuff is part of what I do. I listen and I report. And I added a few late redactings...

In 2014, there are a few people from coast to coast who might get what I'm talking about.

U.S.A.

Enjoy at your own peril.

High School Dialogue

So she said, "Are you frontin', teach?"

And I told her, "I'm for real, yo!"

And she's all, "You best not be playin', dawg!"

And I'm all, "Don't be trippin', girlfirend! It's all chillio on the dillio."

And she says, "No you did-int, pops!"

And I said, "I'm keepin' it real, home girl."

And she's all, "YOU be trippin', bro! Bring it down. Cuz I ain't no fool, cuz."

And I replied, "Chillax, my sister. It's all crack-a-lackin'. That's what's up. Boyeee!"

"Fo shizzle, mah nizzle?"

"Fa sheezy, mah neezy!"

"That's what's up."

"Yo playa, then let's all just keep it on the DL."

"Yay yeh, peace out wid it like we wasn't skurred o' representin'."

"Word."

"And don't be hatin' on the hatorade, and best stay out of my Kool Aid, cuz, 'cuz that'll get it hot up in this piece."

Hold a sec: Is this off the hook?  It ain't off the chain? This be gettin' real, fool...

Chale, homes. Simon carnal, ese. Basta de eso, vato.

But in Ebonics we might just go 'round and 'round, gettin' it on like Donkey Kong!

Do you feel me, G?

You feel me, homey?

Yo, that's what's up, cuz... rillio on the dillio, I am for real.

Good looking out, my peeps.

I ain't no Original Gangsta, but I do feel my OGs foh sheeze.

And nobody said it wadn't nothin' but a G thaing, but...

Let's bring it in on up out of the hizzo, yo, and take it to da' streets and feel the love of the rizzle, dizzle.

Fo sho' I will feel you on the hizzle.

Word, boyeee.

Yes I did.

So chillax, fool.

That's what it be, that's what it was.

Did I stutter?

BLOG IT>EMC> (Maybe, run EMC, like RUN, CLINCH.)

Nats Update: Weeks 17/18 ish

All good things have to end.

And a fun/great run ended last night for the Washington Nationals. They won ten games in a row for the first time as an organization since 2005, when it was their first year in DC, back when they played at RFK Stadium in the south east corner of the District. The commentator and former Expo catcher F.P. Santangelo was part of the Montreal team that did a similar streak in 1997, but he said he enjoyed this one much more.

He said that this one is more significant to the divisional race. Maybe I have never mentioned this, but FP is awesome to listen to. Great announcer. Perfect for what he does.

Everybody contributed; there were multiple thrills with 5 walk-off runs scored to win half of the victories. Atlanta got hot and did not drop back far, but Washington created a nice divisional lead at six games, due to previous mess ups of the Braves.

Last night started off promisingly against Tim Hudson of the Giants, but Doug Fister (now 12-4 for the season) gave up a three run homer to a rookie named Panik  (his first major league homer) and then later a single home run to Buster Posey. To end the chance of a heroic rally, as the Nats have proved capable of accomplishing, Blevins and then Detwiler came in and could not hold very well, giving up 6 more runs.

Oh well!

We'll take it and come back today and try to win the series and keep winning overall.

It's okay to lose after 10 wins in baseball.

We shall see if they get that hot again.

Denard is getting on base and scoring, Rendon is solid, Werth and especially LaRoche have been clutch, Desmond has been productive of late, Harper is hitting and so is Wilson Ramos. And the new guy, Asdrubal Cabrera? Winner. They are 13-5 since acquiring him. Moved him from short to second, and the guy puts up highlight material.

Starters and relievers have done great and played clutch overall, so the Nats just might be the best in baseball right now.

But we will not count our chickens. Regular season and of course the playoffs loom.

But we like their chances.

Go Nats! Nothing but Natitude.

This may be the year. Sorry Montreal, DC may have a winner...At your expense. But you still do better in hockey, right?

Blog it. EMC.

The Hope and the Promise, Part II: Church and Movements

"Somehow college football intersects in[to] our everyday American life. For some of us more than others."

me, last post, 19 August 2014.

In the last post about the "Hope and the Promise" I talked about how BYU changed the face of college football based on their 1984 national championship. The Big Boys (about 65 teams) have been reacting ever since, trying to stop "small conferences" and "small  programs" from winning too much, or winning glory that they do not properly deserve, according to them. Other university teams have tried to break in with them to get glory and power, like Boise State, which has had some great years and beaten the big guys notably in big bowls, as did Utah. BYU and Utah wanted to join the PAC 10 for years; Utah finally did. I failed to mention that Texas Christian University joined the Big 12, and has therefore left behind the "have-nots" of former smaller conferences.

The former Big East Conference has died, or been transformed/adapted into the American Athletic Conference, but it bears little resemblance of what used to be the Big East. Many of those former Big East teams have been absorbed or adopted into former power conferences like the ACC or Big 12. West Virginia in the Big 12 is quite the geographical stretch. The ACC has expanded by taking strong former Big East schools like Syracuse, Virginia Tech, and Boston College. The Big Ten has expanded with four new schools, including one from the Big 12, one from the Big East, and another from the ACC. They kind of cannibalize to stay in power. Also, there are ever more Football Bowl Series (formally Division 1) programs being elevated, like a couple Texas St  and Old Domninion teams, as of last year (2013).

BYU has yet to be invited to the Big 12 or any other major conference, even though it does play everybody and anybody. It seats more and has more tickets purchased than most, including my hometown favorite Indiana Hoosiers. It is better than Kansas in the Big 12, plus Iowa State, better than Duke in the ACC, or Kentucky in the SEC. Most of those teams ride their basketball coffers pretty effectively.

But beyond football, there is the religious and cultural element: BYU has a mission to evangelize. To be a missionary school and program is a goal, but perhaps more importantly, a large part of the overarching goal is legitimize.

Since its inception in 1830, and the years leading up to it, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has been either persecuted or relegated as not legitimate.

While this is to be expected of any new movement or religion, the LDS Church has qualified itself as the newest and most legitimate authority of God on the planet. Well, the actual claim is that it is the original authority, going back to Jesus, David, Moses, Abraham, Noah, Adam...

The 12 apostles since then until now (2014) have posited the same stance: they are the true witnesses of Jesus, His Church, His authority (priesthood) and the Kingdom of God begun by the truly elect of God since the beginning.

And this has made a few waves, naturally, sometimes bigger than other times.

The BYU football squad (and other sports and academic endeavors) has been part of the Church's process of legitimization and recognition. After all, what better way to put the Church and its presence on par with such big time faiths as the Roman Catholics than having a team of mostly Mormons who can compete with the all-American team, the Fighting Irish?

Most people probably differentiate the Catholic Church and its claim to authority and status with the University of Notre Dame and its athletics, as well as that of Boston College (the only two Catholic FBS football programs), but as much as Mormons do not subscribe to worldly treasures like wine and paid clergy people, most Latter-day Saints want to be considered normal enough to fit into regular society. To be a good and wholesome part of it, in fact. Hence, the goals and missions of the faith, both stated and implied.

And football does that.

Make sense?

More later...

Blog on, EMC.

BYU Football: The Hope and the Promise

Somehow college football intersects in our everyday American life. For some of us more than others.

I met a native Alabaman overseas in 2012 who stated adamantly that he hated football, because more or less, the people of his home state were so blindly enraptured with the college football scene that many of them knew about or cared about little else. Yes, I admit, that could be a detractor in life. A turn-off. Mono-focus, or myopia on such a game like a college sport could lead to ignoring much more important matters. Got it.

Yes, if we know more about college football teams and players than other more significant things in life, then that would be a problem. Perhaps that is one of mine! Perhaps it has taken too much of my waking hours. Nevertheless, I do claim to know about other things pretty well. However, my knowledge about certain college football history and trivia is something that I will not easily dismiss, disregard, or ignore. It's programmed into me, for the good or bad. And despite the perhaps accurate statement of that retired Army Alabaman who has his dream home in Poland, I respectfully beg to differ. College football and its passions and stories do not inhibit me, or limit my successes in other fields. But I can understand the argument against my line of reasoning...

I wrote on a couple blogs from 2006 to 2009, more or less; I wrote a number of somewhat passionate stories about college football. My blog on Foxpsorts "papaclinchsaints'it" was dedicated more to Brigham Young University, while "edclinchs'it" (or something to that effect) was more about Indiana University. Both were eventually altered and wiped out on the Foxsports.com site; hopefully they may be found someday in the recesses of the Internet, perhaps stored serendipitously in Ashburn, Virginia, or some such covert storage vault deep in the bowels of our planet. I might be able to review my old ramblings on such matters. Who knows? They say that stuff posted is forever, but I have my doubts.

For now I have this. I hope it sticks around. Sooner or Later. I still have a bit of my own brain and memory.

So, what about BYU football? Why does it matter to the greater college football world? Why does it matter to me and a few others?

30 years ago this year the college football world changed. In 1984, a few bigger football conferences were upset that a "small" college team could win the national championship. And ever since, things have continually been in motion to marginalize the chances of it happening again. A couple of other teams since the BYU Cougars have had their chances to rock the cradle of the giants, but things normally did not go the right way, much to the relief of the power conferences, where the investment and money and power and interest make the world go round. For them. They like their cookies, and they want most of the chocolate chips. Animal crackers are okay to share with the little guys. Does this inform us about other aspects of life?

Who are the big tier schools? The Southeastern Conference. The Big 10. The Atlantic Coast Conference. The Pacific Coast Conference. Add one or two others (like the former Big East) and the Big 12, and these are the bigger haves versus the slightly more numerous smaller school have-nots, conferences of smaller orders. But the have-nots have at times successfully pushed and prodded to get the glory and lime light. BYU has been one. Boise State has been another. At times Fresno State threatened the status quo of the Automatic Qualifiers (AQ) teams, and a few others like Texas Christian have come close a few times. But the top conferences garner the biggest contracts, earning the highest paying rewards, as they are known in relation to the Bowl Championship Series, the big bowls that reward the teams and their accompanying educational programs a lot more hype and money. And yes, money. Hence, the "haves".

Not to forget Our Lady of Notre Dame, which stands somewhat alone in its status as an independent team in football, yet is always kept as a "major", the lone independent AQ. (Big boy). The Fighting Irish have their own television and other money contracts, have maintained their big tier status despite going it alone. They are a staple of television and college football lore. Kind of holy, as it were.

So, how about these upstart Mormons? Not as holy as thou?

BYU has entered this status of independence, a la Notre Dame, since 2010, disassociating itself from its former conferences, yet still not recognized in the same league as Notre Dame football. (It has exceeded them in a few other intercollegiate sports, but football is the cash cow, and somewhat sacred.)

We could argue that it should happen. It could. The original apple cart toppler may topple the system again. It has been thirty years, as stated before. BYU wants to prove it belongs in the same sentence, or at least paragraph, as Notre Dame. And I think it will happen.

The Cougars. Provo, Utah. Not Army at West Point, not Navy in Annapolis, not Air Force in Colorado Springs. These are service academies with their own glory, traditions and histories, but they are not what BYU is in the 21st century. BYU is poised to be a big boy.

BYU, I and others maintain, will make its way among the Automatic Qualifiers. We think. It is a long and sometimes arduous uphill battle, but it is an eventuality.

How did this happen? Or why will it happen?

College football got going in the 19th century with Rutgers in New Jersey. By the 1930s there were some particularly strong programs, some of which had established their long standing traditions of prominence until today, 2014. Michigan. Oklahoma. Alabama. Wisconsin. Ohio State. Penn State. Okay, maybe Penn St. was not a huge deal before World War II, but neither was Florida State as it has been now since the 1980s. Some programs have become institutionally and thus cultually strong in the last 30 years. Boise State can be included in the conversation now, as TCU. The Mountain West Conference has been the outlier little conference pushing the envelope. And BYU left them.

Brigham Young football began in 1922. It did not win much or enough to get on the major football map until Lavell Edwards coached them to headlines in the 1970s. The 1980s got better, a subsequent National Championship in '84 and a Heisman winner in 1990. His last 10 years were not remarkable by any means, but 1996 again showed that the Cougars from Provo could potentially upset the apple cart.

Short lived successor 1st year coach Gary Crowton threw a scare into the system in 2001, before being massacred in the last game by Hawai'i in the islands (gratefully for the BCS teams) in that crazy year. Of course, the events and detritus, as it were, of September 2001 are not to be forgotten, but believe it or not, the delay of college football games due to the September 11 attacks actually effected, perhaps to its grave end of season collapse against the aforementioned Rainbow Warriors, the BYU football Cougars. I have written about that before and maybe will again sometime, especially if asked. (Note to self: sometimes I need to write things out simply to make sure I understand what I am feeling or talking about). Get it documented. 9/11/01 hurt the Cougar football team, perhaps worse than most other programs.

Current and 10 year tenured coach Bronco Mendenhall has done an adequate job, leading the team to its share of success. But they have come up short in the Big Bowl department.

Hopes are still there. It could happen. It could happen this year. Or, as in promising seasons past, they may lose their share of games and go to a minor bowl, as they are want to do.

But BYU is playing with a historical chip on its shoulder. It wants to prove that it belongs.

And it does. It will. The talent and luck will come together one of these seasons.

It could be this one.

More of how and when and who. But just a reminder about the first victim necessary: the Huskies up north of NYC. See you in a week or so.

Blog on. EMC.

Violence in the World...It Is a Constant, 2014

Let's start with the good news: homicides in the United States are consistently decreasing. This is based on data I have seen the last ten, twenty years. The facts are out there. It has steadily been decreasing since the late 1980s. Maybe before.

This is positive. The United States is a big country; a decrease in the number of murders is good. I have read many articles about this trend over the years, while most of the articles do not explain why homicide rates are down, they all acknowledge that this is a trend.

I have written about it somewhere or sometime before, offering conjecture as to why it could be. I have written blog posts, like so many scraps of paper, that have been printed and lost in the winds...Some have disappeared, some are lost in cracks and crags of attics. Nevertheless, I have thought about this a bit. And now I will attempt to provide some observations.

Are more potential US killers locked up in prison, because we have a bigger incarcerated population than ever before? Does the ongoing threat of capital punishment and other harsh sentences prevent or dissuade potential homicidal tendencies?

Has the United States economy and society progressed where people, in general, are less willing to commit violent crimes, worth killing or dying for?

Is it harder to get away with murder, due to modern day forensics and DNA tracking? Therefore, are more possible killers less willing to attempt things that would get them caught?

Are people nicer, kinder: less induced to killing others than previous generations?

Could the reason be as subtle as a demographic shift of fewer children per mother, hence more motherly love and care and less hateful sibling rivalry than ever before? Kids and their grown-up versions are less hateful and hostile?

Could it be something that we cannot account for? More air conditioning? Less hot heads because of easier access to modern appliances? Conjecture on the reasons for the optimistic facts could go on...

But alas, there is plenty of bad news beyond the fact that the diminishing numbers of homicides are prevalent in the United States. It is probably not true in neighboring countries like Mexico, El Salvador, Honduras, Venezuela or Argentina. In some of those places it may be more homicide ridden than ever.

And there are places where violence and wars and battles are constant parts of life.

To name a few this year (2014), there is Syria and Iraq, Afghanistan and Ukraine, a good half dozen places across the continent of Africa, and more recently I have read about renewed hostilities between Azerbaijan and Armenia. That is a long running feud there, even longer than the tussles and bloodletting of Israel and Palestine (Gaza, in particular, as of late).

So no worries, plenty of killing is still going on in the world. (That is meant as sarcasm).

Suicide is not ending; I do not know if that is a steady or increasing trend. But this is about killing others more than ourselves, although both are murder.

I suppose to be completely fair, self-violence is as valid a subject as any. But this post is more having to do with hostile acts and killing behavior against others more than ourselves, even though the damage ends up being quite similar.

So back to violence directed at others through war and hostile intentional murder: it is a constant in our life. We only deal with the rate of how and when it happens, and for what reasons, justifiable or not. Hence we have laws, and other mechanisms to deter its occurrence. We try, usually, to make killing for a useful or necessary purpose.

Homicides, again, are not declared war. Wars are often deemed justifiable for whatever sundry reasons. But violence underlines all of it.

And that is how we are programmed, be it 2014, or 1014. A thousand years ago things were brutal, as it was a thousand years before that, in the time of Jesus. Violence is part of life. And so on and so on, back into our human and animal history. We are not naturally herbivores, per se; some societies are more carnivorous than others. We do not usually literally kill each other to survive, but metaphorically we do use violence and murder, or war or other physical acts of aggression in order to make our societies work.

The threat of violence or punishment make our worlds go 'round.

I believe most great authors and thinkers have dealt with violence, murder and death by lethal or aggressive means. It is an intrinsic part of our nature. We are Darwinian in our habits and behaviors. The strong survive, sometimes in its most visceral means.

Shakespeare certainly did deal with the subject of violence and its consequences 500 years ago, at times contemplating the acts of the Romans 1500 years prior. More recently great writers have done the same ruminations and plot developments, a few Americans of the 20th century to name a few: Hemingway, Faulkner, London, Vonnegut, and so many more. Women, Americans, Europeans, Asians, Africans, we all share this common thread in our lives. Touched directly or not by its effects, we all deal with it.

Some writers and storytellers use murder, death and mystery as their main theme. Agatha Christie and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle come to mind, as well as numerous of their 21st century counterparts. Television and film is replete with the topic.

And of course, the real live news.

What goes on in the world, to our neighbors, foreign and domestic, what causes us to gasp or shake our heads in disgust. Local news, national and international, violence fills our lives.

Wars or not, people are constantly involved in violence.

Is American football or sports like rugby or judo or boxing a good outlet for these aggressive tendencies that humanity seems to crave? Perhaps.

Will the elimination of the proliferation of weapons stem the tide? Not really. It could help.

But violence is a constant, and it will continue. Homicides are down here, but it might only be a current trend as science shows temperatures turn a certain way for a time (global warming, or cooling) and then retrace their steps. Things could get worse...

At the end of the day, violence must be accepted as a factor in the world. But can we resist it? Can we protect better against it? Can we learn ways of stemming the tide of perhaps glorifying or celebrating it too much? Certainly.

How to do that? Shakespeare does not have the answers; our wisest of the wise today do not either.

Will the elimination of certain recreational chemicals reduce violence? Perhaps. Maybe not.

What will it take? Maybe we have to give everybody more of what everyone wants: pampering.

Blog it. EMC.

Washington Nats Update: Week 16 or So. Plus: Legends Live Hard!

The Nationals played well enough to beat the Mets the last two of a three game series. Bryce Harper came up big in the last bat yesterday, and more on that in a few (he hit a two run homer in the 13th inning or so)...

Having opened the first full week of the "Dog Days" of August, the Nationals have benefited greatly from a terrible losing streak of the Braves. Yay!

And now I continue this a couple days later, after another extra-inning win, another big clutch victory but this time against the nemesis current second place Braves. The Braves have had the Nats' number the last few years as the Nationals have emerged as a powerful new team.

To put it into context, Washington started showing real talent and promise in 2011, when they almost finished .500 for the first time in a while after some long, struggling years. Then the team won a bunch of games in 2012 before precipitously falling in the last game of the division series against St. Louis, where the young recovering ace Stephen Strasburg famously was limited to 175 or so innings pitched and no action in the playoffs.

Last year, 2013, was a major disappointment most of the season when it came to wins, and even though by the end they were playing well, the Braves were the team they could never catch, a lot of "too little too late" of a season. The Atlanta Braves have played well against the Nationals this year so far and in previous seasons, so Atlanta is the barometer of where Washington wants to be.

So fortunately for the Nats the Braves went on the aforementioned  calamitous West road trip, going 0-8 against the Giants, Padres and Dodgers.

The would-ace Strasburg came up very disappointing against them Friday night, allowing about 3-4 home runs and 7 runs before the Nats rallied to make it 7-6, a loss all the same.

But Tanner Roark ( a young and new yet very inspiring and tough Nats pitcher) kept them in the late rain delayed game and then Kevin Frandsen after Will Ramos did the damage with the bases loaded to get the 4-1 win.

As stated, Strasburg has struggled and now has a losing overall record. Gio Gonzalez has also scuffled in his starts and is not doing well in the wins column. Fister and Roark are the horses, while Jordan Zimmerman has done middle of the road, which is usually still very good.

The Nationals relievers have struggled a bit out of character of late; a week ago there were a couple of games where the opponents like the Phillies or Marlins, possibly Mets damaged whomever came off the bench, or the bullpen as it were. (Note: a friend who does not watch or follow much baseball said "bullpen" Friday night, related to work, and it is noteworthy that that friend has watched and enjoyed a few baseball movies, but still I found the reference amusing.)

Ryan "the Natural" Zimmerman is still hurt. The Nats acquired Asdrubal Cabrera from the Cleveland Indians, who has been a shortstop but they play him at second base. The addition is now a week in and seems to have been fruitful.

The rest of the players are doing all right: Adam LaRoche being particularly hot as of late (hitting a homer to get the one run for the team last night until extra innings), and especially Denard Span with a 13 game hitting streak and 35 game on base streak, all are contributing. Rendon, Werth, Ramos, now part timer Espinosa, Frandsen, and more recently used Hairston... And of course the relievers like Stammen, Detwiler, Blevins, Clippard, Storen, Soriano and recently acquired hard pitching journeyman Thornton. He is impressive. The commentators remarked that the Nats now have two high 90 mile per hour left hand relievers. The pitching is really good. Good enough to be champs, the conventional wisdom says.

And then there is Bryce.

Legends Live Hard.

How is that , you ask? Much of life is about a messiah, a golden child, a miraculous talent that brings all of the people with him/her to the promised land. This is the hope and curse of Bryce Harper.

Now in the 3rd season of his heralded tenure, the heir apparent wunderkind is just now starting to do the things that were expected of him since being the number one pick back in 2010, due to the terrible losses the team was accruing back then.

He is part and parcel of the "Movement", which has brought fans and critics alike to the table of aspirations that posit the Nationals will win.

Strasburg, 2009 number one pick, heralded at San Diego State. and then Bryce, a heralded teenager with power at the age of 16, noted in Sports Illustrated and other such baseball rags, is the One.

Neo. Hercules. Crazy Horse.

He is the face and hope and cause celebre of the Nationals organization. He is as follows in the August 2014 Wikipedia extract:

 Harper won the 2010 Golden Spikes Award, awarded annually to the best amateur baseball player.[4] Going into the 2012 season, baseball prospect-watchers, including Baseball America, MLB.com, and Baseball Prospectus routinely ranked Harper as a top-3 prospect. He made his MLB debut with the Nationals on April 28, 2012. Harper was selected for the 2012 All-Star Game, becoming the youngest position player to ever be selected.[5] He has been touted as a "five-tool player".[6][7] He has been chosen as the No. 2 corner outfielder in the MLB by professional baseball analytics.[8]

Do you get the picture? Despite many injuries and as many controversies about his character and "hot-headed youthful impudence", and quite a few young player mistakes, the promise may still be fulfilled.

This year. He has shown all the promise in spurts and small portions.

He may be Mickey Mantle. But we know he isn't. And just as young or heralded as Harper has been for his short lived existence, Mike Trout of the Los Angeles Angels, who has been every bit of crazy good (and healthy) with numbers, production and healthy presence to back it up, has been the One. Only a year older but entering the majors at the same time, Mike Trout might be better than Mantle, or Mays, or Griffey or Bonds. I am throwing around a lot of known home run hitters, but Trout is not just a swinger for the fences. The guy plain hits.

So Bryce may never overcome the shadow of Mike Trout. Time and serendipity will tell. Health? Team? Players behind and in front? Even the talent of the pitching.

Trout plays most games with the designated hitter while Harper does not. That should translate to a few points on the offensive production scale in the former's favor. We shall see.

But for now, they both are doing their jobs: helping their competitive teams win.

Long live the legends that always will be, and the thousands who never fulfill the promise.

But we try.

And baseball, a silly but grand American and increasingly international game, will always live up to the legend of what might be. No matter how late in the season, no matter how buried in the standings, a legendary act or feat may still be achieved.

Play on, Bryce.

There once was my favorite player of all time, Tim Raines Senior. Rock. He was great and deserves the Hall of Fame, but his numbers could not compare to Ricky Henderson.

But Raines was as productive as the legendary and recently passed Tony Gwynn, first ballot HOFer.

It's okay. Raines will get there. It is not too late.

Bryce should too. Decades from now. The promise, the pick and flower of Nevada.

Blog. On. EMC