obama/favre ‘08
by Ian Schuldt
Published: July 29, 2008
I have a football problem that I can’t help but compare to politics.
I live on the Minnesota side of the Mississippi River, so close to Wisconsin that I could literally almost hit a golf ball to it. As a big Minnesota Vikings fan growing up, there was no more-hated human being in the world than Brett Favre.
Yeah, I know he’s supposed to be, like, the greatest QB of all time, and he’s basically hailed by every football announcer in the game. For me, though, I hate him. Not because he isn’t good, but just because he beats the Vikings. Like most Minnesotans, I had hoped that we’d seen the last of this guy. I can’t help but feel like the bad guys in all those Scooby Doo cartoons: “We could win the division, too, if it weren’t for that meddling Favre!”
Suddenly, now one of the more interesting predicaments may be on the verge of playing out. Brett Favre is trying to work out a trade to come play for the Vikings. I’m going to say that again just in case there are Packer fans reading this. Brett Favre WANTS to come play for the MINNESOTA VIKINGS!
Not everyone reading this understands the scope of this issue. Without really understanding how deep this rivalry goes, it’s hard to understand why anyone could really have so much hate for someone who is loved by so many. In fact, it’s not even Brett Favre that I can’t stand as much as I can’t stand the Packer fans who worship him.
But whether you understand it or not, it forces people like me into a really tough moral dilemma. If Brett Favre came to Minnesota, we could potentially win the Super Bowl this year. With our defense looking better than ever and rookie of the year Adrian Peterson at running back, we could be almost unstoppable if we had Favre at the helm. But is it worth it? Could I really even enjoy a Super Bowl win if I knew it was delivered to us by Brett Favre?
I have to imagine this is a similar feeling to that of many Hillary Clinton supporters right now. Even though their disdain for Barack Obama is nowhere near my hatred of Brett Favre, they’re still pretty sick of him. While it’s understandable that many of her supporters wouldn’t like him, the reality is that their hatred comes not because they disagree with him on policy or think he would be a horrible leader, but more so because he beat Hillary Clinton.
In fact, much like my hatred of Packer fans, I think that there is probably a lot more hatred toward the Obama supporters than Obama himself. Whether we like to admit it or not, it’s not the person that we despise so much as it is the rivalry. If Favre had been a Viking from day one, I would probably be the biggest Favre fan in history, and I’m betting that if Hillary Clinton had not run this year, every single one of her supporters would have been behind the first serious African-American candidate for president.
So now it comes down to a tough choice. Would I rather win a Super Bowl knowing it was Brett Favre that got us there, or would I rather be stubborn and suffer another potentially losing season? Would you rather see this country return to the symbol of freedom it used to be with Obama as our president, or would you rather suffer four more years of fear-mongering conservatives just so you can say, “I told you so.”
As much as the thought of a purple number-four jersey makes my stomach turn, I can’t help but wonder, what if? What if Favre did jump the river? It’s possible he’s too old and he would end up continuing to break his own record for most interceptions in a career, but it’s also possible he could have another ridiculous season in defiance of all logic.
As much as the thought of an Obama presidency may not sit well with some Clinton supporters, you have to ask yourself, what if? If Obama does win the presidency, it’s possible that his inexperience could overwhelm him and he could be a complete flop. But it’s also possible that all those fancy speeches and promises of hope could come true. The fact that he has about an 80% approval rating throughout the world may help our foreign relations problems.
I don’t have the ability to vote to decide if Brett Favre becomes a Viking and, if I had my druthers, I’d rather bring back Joe Montana to play for us. But as it stands, Brett Favre could be the one piece of the puzzle that could actually win us a Super Bowl for the first time ever. There’s a potential there that if I really love the Vikings, I just can’t ignore.
It’s amazing that in a world where 69% of the country can disapprove of a president, only 46% seem to want to elect someone different. Whether Obama will live up to everything he’s billed as remains to be seen, but I find it hard to believe that even the staunchest of Hillary supporters could honestly believe their country is better off in the hands of another George W. Bush. If someone like me could find it within himself to let Brett Favre wear the purple in gold, then I think the least we could do is give Obama the chance.
—
(email this article or post to social network)
—
July 30th, 2008 at 11:08 am
The political opinions of this website ought be driven by sporting events. I don’t know why mainstream hasn’t caught on. Well done Ian.
July 30th, 2008 at 12:12 pm
I love the continuing, narrow minded, almost blinkered, drumbeat meme that McCain represents ‘another George Bush’. Wouldn’t Hillary have simply been ‘another Clinton’…and if Obama is indeed ‘another Kennedy’ should we be worried about sterling accomplishments like the Bay of Pigs and Viet Nam?
That said, the Clinton Democrats are facing no harder choice than many conservative Republicans do with McCain. He earned his ‘Maverick’ monikerr honestly. It’ll be inteesting to see how many voters, of both parties, enter the booth this fall holding their nose.
July 30th, 2008 at 4:27 pm
Oh Ian. Why oh why? First of all, Brett Favre Wants to play for the Packers but THE PACKERS do not want him (I personally want him to come back to Green Bay). So his Second Choice is Minnesota, and I am sure it is to piss off Green Bay for telling him to get lost and stay retired. If he did go to MN i think that the Packers had it coming.
Secondly, I can’t agree with your statement that Obama will return the country to the symbol of freedom it used to be. Actually, I wasn’t aware that we lost that symbol. People come to America because it is a Symbol of Freedom. However, before I get into bashing Obama I want to see what he has to say besides hope and change. If I wanted to hear that I could just watch Evan Almighty, because that is almost the same slogan that Steve Carell used in that movie. Until I hear something out of his mouth other than John McCain is the next George Bush, I will not blindly follow him just because he is different. Yeah, he is black which would be a historical thing for this country. However, his inexperience may be the worst thing for our country. But I will wait until the debates to make up my mind on Mr Obama.
As for McCain, I agree with what Russ said. McCain is a Maverick and I think he is too moderate for most Republicans. By making him the presumptive nominee, I think the GOP handed the election to the Dems.
All in all my favorite part of the article is the following line: I can’t help but feel like the bad guys in all those Scooby Doo cartoons: “We could win the division, too, if it weren’t for that meddling Favre!”
July 30th, 2008 at 9:24 pm
Ian, great article!
I hate Bret Favre with a passion (actually, I think that’s one of the reasons my ex girlfriend, whose from Green Bay, recently dumped me). But if he would come over here to MI and join the Lions, he’d be my new BFF… if for no other reason than a big Up Yours to the Packers.
July 30th, 2008 at 9:44 pm
As a somewhat regular reader of the articles posted here I have to say that the “We could win the division, too, if it weren’t for that meddling Favre!” is the best line to date.
August 5th, 2008 at 8:18 pm
Oooo… I don’t know. Jason Bradley’s line from “Drinking Up Candidates” was pretty durn good…
In comparing candidates to drinks:
The “McCain Martini” is best served straight - but mixes well with a little hint of crazy. It’s also known as the “Kucinich” and the “Gravel.”
http://www.therebuttal.com/2008/01/11/drinking-up-candidates/
August 12th, 2008 at 2:15 pm
I think it is interesting that for as much as people don’t approve of the president, congress’ approval rating remains 10% lower. So here’s the real question if 71% of people disapprove of Bush and 81% disapprove of congress, can we get a clear poll on the Supreme Court and then start with a clean slate free-for-all government sweep?
We’ll have a great big nationwide 1776 party, read the Constitution out loud and then vote by secret ballot. It’ll be great. We can invite UN to dress us and come stage a mock battle with us using paintballs and rubberband guns.
It doesn’t sound any more ridiculous to me than a democratic republic with 20-30% approval raitings for its elected officials.
The moral of this farce, everyone needs to get out and vote so we don’t stay in this limbo where no one seems to like what is happening and nothing is done to change it.
No, I don’t think either of the current candidates is up to making that change . . . and I don’t think Ron Paul is the answer for any of you who thought I was leading up to that.