re: Lebron vs. Jordan first 6 seasons

ESPN erroneously stated in an article comparing Lebron James to Michael Jordan that Lebron has had a superior start to his career when you compare the two players first 6 seasons. Since I am not an ESPN Insider I could not read the article, just the beginning which stated the above comment. I do not know if ESPN came to reality and only had an attention grabbing start to their article before coming to their senses, but it is clear Jordan has been superior to Lebron. Compare the statistics of the two players (note: Jordan's second season, in which he only played in 18 games due to injury, is excluded) Statistical leaders are bold.

Jordan averages first 6 seasons:

32.9 PPG, 6.35 RPG, 6.0 APG, 2.8 SPG, 1.0 BPG, 3.16 TO
52.5 FG% , 24.2 3P%, 84.8 FT%, 39.15 MPG

James averages first 6 seasons:

27.5 PPG, 7.0 RPG, 6.68 APG, 1.75 SPG, 0.85 BPG, 3.28 TO
46.9 FG%, 32.5 3P%, 73.8 FT%, 40.5 MPG

Clearly, Jordan holds the advantage thus far. He shot a much higher percentage from the field and charity stripe, scored more points, collected more steals and blocked shots, and committed fewer turnovers while playing fewer minutes (essentially doing more in less time). Expectedly, Lebron has more rebounds and assists and a slightly better assist/turnover ratio. He is also a better outside shooter. However, the rebound and shot blocking are an eye-opener. Jordan, a 6'6" guard, had more blocked shots and nearly as many rebounds as the 6'8" James, who is a forward. Lebron is an amazing player, a certain Hall of Famer, and will be mentioned with the greatest of all-time. But to think he has surpassed Jordan at this juncture in their careers is certainly incorrect.

The Anti-Tax Tea Parties

Earlier this month, 'patriotic' Americans engaged in tea parties to show their disagreement with the Obama Administrations spending. By any measure government spending has been unrestrained in Obama's first 100 days. Americans who are adamantly opposed to taxation have every right to voice that displeasure, as well. Obviously, this is the United States of America, where we have the ability to say what we feel. Unfortunately, this tea party is more hollow partisanship than the true exercising of Constitutional rights. I am sure there are many among the tea party participants who have harbored resentment toward the IRS, the government, the tax code, etc. for several years that were elated to have an avenue to protest. This is certainly their perogative and I cannot fault them. However, for the right-wingers in the crowd who are strictly anti-Obama this is just hypocrisy. Where were these whistle-blowing patriots for the last 8 years? If you are going to be against absurd government spending now then you should have been against it then, too. George W. Bush increased government spending more than any president since Lyndon Johnson (http://www.independent.org/newsroom/news_detail.asp?newsID=31) See also http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-04-02-federal-spending_x.htm.

It is impossible to argue that Obama's spending has not been unprecedented, and to be sure he has spent more than Bush. However, the circumstances are hardly similar. Obama came into office facing the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression with wars going on in Iraq and Afghanistan. Bush entered office 9 months prior to the September 11th attacks. Whether or not the Obama administration can salvage the financial system through its spending remains to be seen, but they have the luxury of the remainder of his term to right the ship. Bush is out after two terms of record spending. How did all of these tea party attendess suddenly realize the government was spending money it doesn't have? Is it because they suddenly started reading the Wall Street Journal or is it because they are upset their candidate lost in November?