Even though he coached at Indiana...

I've always liked this Ohioan.

bored

Just to stir up some fun (I hope):

Apparantly there is a huge uprising in the Episcopalian Church. You can read about it here. But to save you the time, I'll just tell you what it's about. Basically, specific churches are seceding over the church's decision to annoint an openly gay bishop (V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire). Which makes absolutely no sense because by Episcopalian tradition, no bishop can operate outside the boundaries of his diocese. So churches even within New Hampshire but outside his diocese aren't affected, let alone in places like Virgina, California or Nigeria. I think the best guess here is that these jackoffs (as they will now be so lovingly referred to) are so preoccupied with forcing conservative dogma down the throats of those too simple to think on their own that they have thrown all pretense of reason into the wind - which shouldn't be and isn't a very big surprise when it comes to dealing with religion and zealots.

Essentially, what they are protesting is his being openly gay. Had he never come out, things would have been fine and no one would have moved for a rift in the church. In other words, it would have been more acceptable for him to continue living a lie (which he did do for some time to the point of marrying and having children before accepting his homosexuality). I'm not sure what message these jackoffs are trying to send through their secession, but the act is essentially saying that a collected group of devout Episcopals would rather their leader and Bishop lie to them.

Herein lies the problem with religious devouts: they are unable to think reasonably when confronted with an issue challenging to their faith. The immediate answer is "The Bible says it's wrong so it's wrong." The whole purpose of a Bishop is to oversee the work his subordinates do in spreading the Word of God. Does being gay in any way affect this? I fail to see how it would. Is it hypocritical to the context of the faith? Perhaps. But let us consider a two points:first, the fact that he was raised to his current status not only by the normal voting procedure, but by that procedure being carried out during the Episcopal General Convention of 2003. Which means had it been an issue that horrendously upsetting to the faith, there is no way he would have ever passed the ELECTION PROCESS. Let me say that again in case you missed it: he was elected. His office was gained within the proper tenants of Church Law in the presence of representatives from parishes all over the country. A democratic procedure isn't something that is used when convenient and the results make everyone happy. If there was only one point of view, there wouldn't be a need for democracy. Nonetheless, when the system fails your cause, you don't abandon it. To me, the Episopal Church should make no effort whatsoever to accomodate these hypocrytical, self-satisfying jackoffs. They are using it to achieve their own selfish ends when it's convenient to use. Their cause would be much more noble and tolerable to the sensible if they remained a part of the Church and used their faith to try to defend their point of view. What they are doing now is simply taking their faith and going home because they didn't get their way.

Secondly, am I expected to believe that God would speak to the masses through the mouth of someone so profainly vested in sin? Or is he not speaking through the Bishop at all? Is it more that He has turned his back to his followers? The implications on these lines seem to suggest that the faith should be abandoned completely. If you believe that God is active in your faith, how can you believe that He would allow something so dreadfully wrong to occur in the upper echelons of the faith? I am forced to conclude that a God worth worshipping would have enough wherewithall to not allow something profain to the faith to reach such a standing in the Church.

More to the point, as I said earlier, being gay does not affect his ability to perform his job. I have a rampant love affair going with my hand and it doesn't affect my ability to do my job. And I can assure you thuoghts of my hand consume more time than his love of men. Because it's pretty much all the time. Which makes sense. When you have the penile equivalent of the Hope Diamond you pretty much have to fawn over it all the time. It's only a matter of time until it gets taken away and put in the Smithsonian. Cherish it people! Cherish it!

What?

Who the shit is Victor Davis Hanson? Is he the guy that lives above me? I hate that guy.

I do, however, like Libyans. Their acting is unequalled (watch Back to the Future for proof). Comic genius! Like that part where the gun won't fire and Marty runs to the DeLorian...man that's hysterical. And only partly because you can't understand whatever language they speak (French?). They totally make that movie (without them Marty never gets in the time machine). So based on their unholy...acting...talent! I must conclude that their doctors are without peer as well. Therefore Victor Davis Hanson is a silly person.

Q.E.D.

Libyan Vacation

Victor Davis Hanson has a brush with death in Libya and lives to tell about it. Can you imagine having to have an emergency appendectomy in some poor Islamic clinic? Frightening.

ha ha, maureen dowd

Catching up on my reading lately, In the Nov. 16 Rolling Stone (I don' t know why I get it) John Stewart says of his interview with Maureen Down (NY Times columnist): "I didn't know we were going to have to be high for this interview."

More on everything else later while both you and I absorb this comment.

Rematch?

After watching the USC/Notre Dame game last week, I thought OSU/USC matchup would be a good one. Plus there is some old Rose Bowl rivalry history to go along with such a game.

Assuming Florida wins the SEC championship game and USC loses to UCLA, Florida could be said to deserve a shot.

Who deserves to go? That is a tough question. Michigan's only loss is to the Buckeyes. Florida and USC both lost to lesser teams. You could also say that Michigan had their shot, and that USC or Florida deserve a shot at OSU. I fail to see how Michigan would be eliminated from a playoff system though since they will finish 4th at worst in the polls/BCS. Florida is perhaps more deserving considering the tougher schedule they had than USC.

Florida is the least interesting matchup national TV/rivalry wise, and I don't think Chris Leak can hang with the Buckeyes. A USC matchup has a broader national appeal than either Fla. or Michigan. It'll likely be USC. If the Buckeyes win, Florida will have the biggest grievance. That said, what Buckeye fan wouldn't want to beat Michigan twice in the same year?

More on the rematch

I agree with John, but am not sure whether I want a rematch or not. I'm truly ambivalent. I kind of want a rematch for these reasons: I really think UM is better than anybody else out there (excluding us, of course), and a rematch could cause the kind of outrage that would make people start thinking seriously about a tournament (see Urban Meyers' comments from a few weeks ago). I want to avoid a rematch, however, because of the following: I honestly fear getting beat the second time (call me a pessimist), and playing them again--especially after that unbelievable game on the 18th--seems kind of unnatural, like necromancy or trying to raise a loved one from the dead (not that I "love" the Wolverines, but we do share a kind of necessary, existential connection that transcends football). At any rate, this ambivalence has rendered me unable to root for either side in either of USC's final two games. I just want it to be over so we can start concentrating on who we'll play.

OSU-Mich rematch

While I agree with Nick that it would probably be the best game, I think it would be a perfect example of why college football will never be able to crown a legitimate champion (especially if Mich wins, which means each team is 1-1 against the other) owing to the fact that in a playoff system (which seems infintely more appropriate and respectful than the rooting through dog puke methods the BCS uses now) Michigan would have been eliminated from championship contention. You shouldn't get a mulligan when playing for something as "prestigious" as the national college football championship. That would make it even less respectable than it is now.

Senator-elect Webb

Although I didn't vote for him, I thought Jim Webb might turn out to be a decent Democrat Senator despite the awful campaign run by both candidates down here. However, he's off to a poor start without actually having started his term.

No more Hobbits for Peter Jackson

According to the December 1 issue of Entertainment Weekly, New Line has announced Jackson will not direct the film adaptations (it appears they're going to milk two pictures out of it). The article cites some contract disagreement, blah, blah...this sucks.

Thousandfold Thought

A pretty honest review of The Thousandfold Thought, the last in Bakker's trilogy, which I think has just come out. I will say this: Bakker is trying to do a lot more than most authors with his books. It doesn't always work, but as these things go, the mere effort makes it more compelling than most of the alternatives on the fantasy shelf.

I'm in the first third of the second book of the trilogy, The Warrior-Prophet. I'm a bit underwhelmed so far. Apparently spent 12-13 years writing and polishing the first book, and then, once the contract came in, wrote the second in less than a year. It shows. But I'd still rather read him than, say, I'm-going-to-teach-you-how-to-pronounce-my-character's-names Robert Jordan.

So...

Knowing next to nothing about college football, and having heard all of the arguments each way over and over again, I'll throw this out there:

OSU and Michigan should rematch for the national championship.

Why? Because it's the only game I want to watch.

I mean, really. How many times to did Rocky and Apollo Creed rematch? At least two. And they would've done more if Apollo hadn't died. But before that they became friends. See my point?

Ding Dong...

...He might be dead. But what's next for Cuba?

super-dooper poopy head

Bert: what the hell is going in Virginia???

Not the party of the common man...

...as George Will points out.

I am no populist, and as it turns out, Democrats aren't either. (We do have something in common!) It seems they empathize with the working man only as long as it doesn't involve capitalism.

Full disclosure: I love Wal-Mart and go there an average of twice a week.

The Media Lied. People died.

Christopher Hitchens explains the outrageousness that was the Valerie Plame/Joe Wilson affair.

As many observers noted way back in the middle of this mess, most notably Byron York at National Review, there was nothing there.

Well, that's not exactly correct because the people who were accusing the administration of a vendetta knew all along that it wasn't true. Along the way an investigation was instigated into a crime that was never committed.

It is now clear--as if it wasn't before--that many in the media are out to get the administration, not to report the news. This would be laughable perhaps if there wasn't so much at stake. But it is apparent that no one in the media is going to answer for this stuff in any meaningful way.

The New York Times publishes sensitive intelligence information and what is done to punish them? Nothing. Hopefully the NSA leaker will be prosecuted. But one wonders where the sanity is in any of this.

RE: This is why everyone.....

I think the metaphor of you in a whorehouse is perfect. I can't imagine anyone else I know being better at spending money on "pet projects" (pork?) in a whorehouse than you. I'll bet there are other things you're good at, but I just wanted to point out how great you'd be at buying hookers.

This is why everyone should have listened to me

Apparently its worthwhile to look at gov't spending when one pary controls both houses of Congress and the Presidency. You know, 'cuz Republicans have been spending money like me at a whorehouse (or some other applicable metaphor). The argument goes that one party controls gov't like that it is more apt to get its pet projects (also known as pork) though; ie, wasting more money.

My response? Duh. I've been saying that for a while now.

Republicans are just as much power hungry whores as are Democrats. Except Ron Paul.

Pirating

I see he has, oddly, pirated the symbol of Bourbon France as well as adopted an interesting--to be kind--constitutional theory about lobbying.

Yeeeeaarrrrrgh!

So if I lived in Iowa, I'd vote for this guy. He's running for Congress as a pirate. Like the "Arrrrgh, Matey" kind of pirate. Check him out. He's pretty stellar.

Deric's Football Message

Here it is; the spacing and formatting got messed up--sorry. I really hope you can all make it. If not, we'll do the draft-by-proxy thing as needed.
-----------------------------------------

To: "Brandon Roberts" , carathers@hotmail.com, ihatebutter@hotmail.com, elarson13@yahoo.ie

Hey all. Greetings and crap like that... Here is what I see as our roster this year. Eric Larson, Miles Larson, Mike Carathers, John Tedesco, Kris Stanya, Brandon Roberts, Mark Thut, Jarrod Bottomley, Brian Tedesco, Matt George, Nick Hoffman, Chad Landsettle. Everyone please look in the'To:' line and if you notice that a name is not represented here forwardthis to them.

The drills: E$'s house again. Friday Sept. 1st. Rule revisions,additions, etc. " " " . Saturday Sept. 2nd. OSUv. NIU. as well as the draft. This will likely be a long day then eh? Same as last year.
Understanding that we are nowscattered all over the country, many will be hard pressed to attend. Send someone with a sheet of your requests, suggested rule changes, your amount of beer, and anything else that represents their views. Equipment: Beer or other drinks of choice. (bring enough tosatisfy your addiction level). Grillable meats. There is a Marc'sgrocer, within walking distance which generally has great brat prices. If you plan on arriving before the end of normal grocery hours, you canbuy them there, as well as the beer. Game day: Unfortunately our first game is the following Thursday which will force me to be ultra punctual with the entry of teams, andyou to check y'alls roster ASAP. I will have them entered as soon as I can get them in I promise. Trophy: I have noticed that we are the only FF league on theplanet that has no hardware. The first year the winner was to receive adrink from everyone in the league which I'm sure didn't happen, and thenwe seem to have fallen away from such rewards. Please consider whatwould be reasonable and affordable compensation for league dominance. $10/team winner take all/75%; gift certificate to build-a-bear; 3 Cases of canned goods? whatever people like. God I love you all, and Football is Darn fine as well... Toodles, andplease reply ASAP whether you will be in attendance, or involved in the league at all...

Boy, ya got me....

Apparently, these people do.

And no, I guess you don't need to respond. In lieu of any argument, I'll have to assume "statist" is another one of those wilfully manipulable, ill-defined, sophistical buzzwords of convenience, like "judicial activist."

Hand-raising and what not

I did not receive the football email, and I cannot top Slaps's hand-raise. georgeb@wlu.edu

That aside, I take it from your statism post that you have secured a job or are trying to secure one on a university English faculty (one of the few places where it is believed there are people in this country who look to and trust in GWB as our capital L Leader).

Come on e-money... Do I really need to respond?

FOOTBALL!!!!!

Just to get everyone in the proper mindset for football season here is a series of clips of some great hits from the past. And it concludes with the greatest hit EVER (hint: it involves L.T. and that gasbag Joe Theisman). What could be better than grown men beating the hell out of each other every week? The answer? Nothing. Woot!

On "statism"....

Yeah, I've been out for a while, so I'm gonna need you to define that word for me. You probably don't mean "intolerant of dissent," "a proclivity to run around accusing political opponents of treason," "dogmatic, if not evangelical faith in the transcendent moral virtue of the state," "willingness to relinquish personal liberties so The Leader can 'keep us safe,'" "tendency to ascribe divine qualities to said Leader," or any stuff like that. You mean affirmative action and food stamps, don't you?

Fantasy Football Returns

Sorry I haven't chimed in for a while...been busy. We're rounding up the usual suspects for fantasy football once again. If you are one and you didn't get my brother's e-mail yet, raise your hand. Questions or concerns should be forwarded as soon as possible. I hope to see all of you.

GG

I think Kris already mentioned it, but this man is brilliant and his blogs are worth visiting every day.

Re: South Paws Rule

It's sad what people get paid to do.

This just in: Statistics show that short, hairy men are 79% more likely to have to beat off women with a stick than their tall, hairless counterparts.

Or the exact opposite.

GOP cleansing?

"Throw the bums out!" says a former Reagan man. I for one hope it happens.

South Paws Rule

Interesting news for awesome men like myself.

The Man holding everyone down apparently uses his left hand.

Re: Leiberman

I was pulling for Leiberman to win the nomination in '04 as well. No suprise he lost in '04. He really showed some character in that race by bucking the venemous anti-war types and made up for the whoring he did as the VP candidate in 2000. He has been a little weak in this race since he had to confront the criticism from the left and woo lefties.

A little more suprising he lost yesterday. He will have a difficult time running as an independent, but he does have some momentum going in the last few weeks despite the loss.

This is certainly bad for the Democrats. They have fewer and fewer reasonable people in their ranks the more this stuff happens. There is a constituency for hard left politics, but it can't be a majority in this country. It is in large part geographically isolated to the coasts and large cities and demographically isolated to aging radicals and dumb kids who haven't made any money or started families yet.

It will be interesting to see what happens if Joe wins. Will he feel free to be even less statist-liberal and more hawkish? Or will he feel the need to get back in good graces with his party? Will they take him back? This depends in part on who takes the reigns of the party in the next few years. If the Clintons take the party back, Joe will likely be taken back no matter what. If the Deaniacs and lefties continue to gain ground, Joe might be an independent for a long while.

Joe-mentum

Bert:
Do you really think Leiberman is going to lose in CT? I say no way. If anything, this just hurts Democrats in the long run, as Leiberman will no longer be part of their party (officially). In the Pres primarys for the last election, I was pulling for Leiberman, despite knowing a Jewish guy is not going to be elected President any time soon. Anyway, that's my $.02

Independent Joe

Some good and some bad news.

Great Expectations

Buckeyes ranked #1. #1 and #2 will have a showdown in Austin Week 2.

More Whining about an Estate Tax Cut

The minimum wage/estate tax cut bill, thankfully, failed to go to a vote in the Senate.

E.J. Dionne, like me, is happy about this, but for the opposite reason. He whines about the estate tax cut being an example of "the central goal of the currently dominant forces of politics: to give away as much as possible to the truly wealthy." Of course he doesn't explain how letting people keep their own money is giving away money to the wealthy.

The whining is not because the Republicans pulled some fantastic, hypocritical prank. The bill would have passed if it had reached the floor. Liberals are just mad because they will be the loser here. It was a good political move that will hurt the Democrats. The Democrats prevented the minimum wage from being increased simply because of the estate tax cut. Despite all the crying, Americans are not offended by the thought of an estate tax cut. So the Democrats now have to explain why they didn't raise the minimum wage, which means crying about how the Republicans are just out to help the rich. Nothing new here.

This whining is drowned by Dionne's glee over his prediction of the collapse of conservatism. He, disingenuously, praises conservatives like Bill Buckley and George Will and National Review only because they are currently discontented with the Republican leadership. He predicts a Democrat victory in November. While the Democrats will likely be marginally victorious, the election will not signal the end of the conservative movement and its replacement by a resurgent liberalism. As vulnerable as the Republicans are, the Democrats have not offered up any reason to vote for them other than Bush-hatred. They continue to adhere to the stale statism of the last sixty years just adding some anti-Americanism to the mix. This is not a winning platform.

Ouch!

Fishing is dangerous.

Watch this:

Whenever I'm depressed or pissed off I watch this and always laugh. Its never not funny.

Kids being kids

I suppose if this is what kids have to deal with for being kids I understand now.

Also, I agree with Elton. I need some crazy gender-bending glam rock.

Glam it up, please...

...says Elton.

WaPo

It boggles my mind how things like this are frequently printed in one of the most-read newspapers in the country.

I will agree, however, that many Republicans are only concerned with keeping power and not governing. Or, at least their brand of responsible governing means acting like a Democrat.

But this partisan nonsense is nearly Dowd-like.

First, the author assumes without argument that an increased minimum wage is a moral imperative. Apparently opposing an increase in the minimum wage makes one a "Dickensian grotesque". Wait, actually just being a Republican might make you a Dickensian grotesque.

Second, cutting the estate tax is a similar moral outrage, and Republican's are evil Machiavellians for tying this to a minimum wage increase. Good God man! It's called compromise. Legislators have been doing it since the dawn of legislatures!

Finally, these same evil Republicans wield a far-right ideology that is allowing the "corporate welfare state" to crumble and global warming to turn the planet to "toast".

This guy doesn't even know what "far-right ideology" is if he thinks the big-government, big-spending, out-democrat-the-democrats Republicans are far right. Elect me and some other real right-wingers and we'll make this pantywaste cry.

No. I take that back. Let's elect this guy. Low-paying entry jobs will start at $15 an hour and afford 17-year-olds and illegal immigrants lavish lifestyles. The planet will cool down with the stroke of a pen. Candy and nuts will rain from the sky.

Cindy Garrison

I'd say we fight over her, but she's just gonna rape and kill the winner anyways. Or maybe kill then rape. Either way, there's no real winner. Except her, I guess.

More BSG

OK, OK this is the last I'll say about BSG for a while. But I watched the 1st episode last night. ANd it was great. Not much in the way of politics, but I will say this, hopefully to draw Bert in: The enemy (the Cylons, in case you didn't know) utilize terrorist tactics against the humans. And the humans have to decide how to defend themselves against these attacks (attacks that seemingly involve both hiding behind civilians and killing civilians). Good stuff. I don't want to spoil anything in case you do start watching. So do it.

Wow

John, Kris, is this the woman for you?

Pornstar

Yeah. You know, I think Kris and I saw that on one of the HBO specials we stayed up to watch. They can be very informative.

At any rate, at least she's basically prostituting herself out in the open, which is more than I can say for most political figures. Plus, I like her campaign slogan: "For the Bare and Honest Truth." Although I expect her campaign to fail, desptite the fact that her boobs don't fit through the limo's sunroof (I suggest you all go look at her campaign galleries), if there's one place she stands a chance, it's gotta be in the home of good, ol Las Vegas. Also, I like that she's the new face republicans. If she wins maybe I'll go republican. It'd be a little less embarassing having a pornstar associated with the party than the current faces.

If I were a kid today, I'd be in big trouble

Here's an article saying what I've been thinking for at least 10 years: That kids today are pussies.
Its 8 pages, but it is interesting and will probably piss you off ("...In my day we beat each other to death with baseball bats!")
1. College students suffer from anxiety??? Look, that is not a legitimate mental disorder. Of course you should be anxious at certain times in college (writing a big paper, studying for an important test). It is healthy to be able to cope with stress.
2. Parents complaining about their children's grades? I would be mortified if my parents did this to me. But in college?? Embarassing for everyone involved.
3. 40,000 schools have canceled recess?? Permanantly??? How will kids beat the shit out of each other? Learn to avoid the authorities? These are all important skills later in life.
4. Despite finally breaking down and getting a cell phone, I am still fundamentally opposed to them. And they do help children to not break ties with their parents and set out on their own (e.g., my sister).

The whole point of all this is it really made me think of my childhood (and apparently how freakin' great it was compared to these narcs). I had acres of woods to explore without any parental supervision. I could bike almost anywhere I wanted to (and NEVER wore a bike helmet). We never had enough kids in the neighborhood to play a pickup game but we played a crapload of tag and "shoot each other with play guns," which I assume is probably illegal now. We had TWO recesses everyday in elementary school and would play tag on wooden playground equipment. Which was already against the rules. I remember falling off the giant 2-story slide in fourth grade. I think I blacked out. Basically, I am saying that all parents need to do is to make sure kids are doing well enough in school and not killing or committing crimes, etc. Next time I talk to my parents I need to thank them for not doing any of the crap that parents do now.

My basic life philosophy revolves around doing things for myself. If someone else does it I can't really learn from it. I'd rather do things wrong myself than someone else do them right. But I guess self sufficiency isn't too popular anymore.

Porn star...

...running for governor of Nevada.

the administration

Kris, I have to agree, mostly, with what you said about the administration. The president is not a conservative in the political sense. He is socially conservative, and that is about it. But conservatives are pretty unhappy with the president in the last couple of years. He enjoys some support from conservatives because the Democrats are so vehemently against him and because of the war on terror (although many conservatives have bolted).

The Democrats' dislike of Bush is somewhat inexplicable concerning domestic policy. Bush is governing like a Democrat at home. The war (maybe not even the war) and the tax cuts are really all they would, in more sane times, disagree with. The left's pacifisim and libertinism on social issues are in the forefront perhaps because they cannot criticize Bush domestically since he has governed as they would.

It is somewhat silly to hear Democrats complain about spending and No Child Left behind or the prescription drug bill. These are democratic bread and butter. Only conservatives have any legitimate beef here.

Young Americans

Courtesy of my personal hero, Greg Gutfeld, comes this trailer to the upcoming documentary from Pat Dollard. Don't watch this at work. Lots of swearing and some gory war footage. Powerful stuff. I reccomend the "Video Clip" movie, second down. Others are good too. Like the Iraqi translator that wants to fight Michael Moore. Impressive.

Ann Coulter?

Ann Coulter's only redeeming quality is that she has good taste in music. Sometimes she is kind of funny too I guess. Most of the time she a crazy bitch though.

G.O.B. for President

Bert, I think you are right about the Democrats (and liberals in general) on only wanting to discredit the current administration. However, you cut the Pres. and his admin waaaaay too much slack. I mean, for a supposedly "conservative" administration we've seen gov't grow more than under Clinton. Although, I still argue that the Repub. congress and Dem Pres. couldn't get anything done because they were too busy arguing with each other. With Repubs in power on both branches pretty much anything either side wants gets through. There is a presidential veto for a reason. I mean, COME ON!

A joke...

...to interrupt my super-seriousness.

Ann Coulter on treason at the New York Times:

"[The New York Times's] reaction to al-Zarqawi's death was to lower the U.S. flag at the Times building to half-staff. (Ha ha -- just kidding! Everybody knows there aren't any American flags at The New York Times.) "

BSG

Yo,
If you guys got the yellow fever there's a bitchin' Asian party over at Princeton.

Really though, I am intrigued and am going to start watching with Slaps.

Democrats cont.

According to the Democrats, Israel has every right to defend itself, but they just shouldn't be allowed to defend themselves with guns.

While Democrats attack the Bush administration for Maliki's Israel criticism, they claim an immediate cease-fire with Hezbollah is a moral imperative.

Warren Christopher, giant of American foreign policy, explains why killing bad guys needs to stop. Apparently former Clinton administration officials deserve our attention concerning the Middle East what with their stellar anti-terrorism and Arab/Muslim-Israeli peace record.

John Kerry explained how simple the solution was...er...sort of. (If only we could go back in time, that is.) He said this wouldn't have happened if he was president. The Arabs and other Muslims presumably would have become friends of Israel upon his inauguration. Either that or Kerry would have ordered Israel to bend over and take it like a Frenchman. And obviously Israel would bow to Kerry's wishes instead of pulling the strings behind the neocon conspiracy.

Look, I'm not terribly happy with the President, but Democrats just can't be trusted. Their only guiding principle is get Bush. They say anything, even this contradictory conspiracy theory/fantasy nonsense, in an attempt to discredit the President. It seems that, to them, Bush is the enemy. This is not the function of a loyal opposition. It's quite disloyal in many respects and dangerous.

super-serious stuff

Peter Beinart again takes issue with his fellow liberals over their reaction to Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki's visit to the US.

I'm not a fan, and the magazine he edits is not as good as it has been in the past. But Beinart is an independent voice in his party these days. Democrats could do worse than take his advice.

re: gas

Bert, the point you missed was watch Battlestar Galactica.

Gas

I agree that gas taxes should not be increased. I think they should be lowered actually.

Demand for gas, however, is relatively inelastic. No doubt many people are changing their driving habits. However, demand for gas and oil is not declining in any similar proportion, if at all, to the increase in cost. Demand does not change as much for gas and oil as it does for other goods with similar percentage price increases.

If the price continues to rise, demand will certainly decline to some extent or at least in certain segments of the market, but it will decrease more slowly than the price increases.

If gas prices increase and people do not expect them to decline or expect them to keep increasing, they will begin to change thier habits and maybe even consider fuel costs as a factor in where they live as you explained.

Full disclosure: I'm not an economist.

BSG

To switch gears (and sort of keep with the StarWars/sci-fi theme of the title) I am going to highly highly reccomend the Sci-Fi channel's Battlestar Galactica. I just finished the first 3 hours of the miniseries last night and was completely rivited. I haven't enjoyed anything as much in a long time. I think even super-serious Bert might like it. It has everything: action, drama, politics, subterfugeLook, I just can't reccomend it enough. Also certain cast members are easy on the eye. My favorite ( to admire for beauty) is Grace Park who plays the pilot "Boomer." However, the coolest character so far is definitely the Chief of the docking bay (I don't know his name). He's pretty bad ass about his job. Here, also, is a picture of the lovely Grace Park to admire. Enjoy.

Gas Prices

I disagree with the idea that gas is an inelastic good. Like John, I drive significantly less due to high gas prices. The claim that people need their car to get to work is not an argument for inelasticity, a person chooses where they live. I choose to live close to my job/school so I can walk or bike in. Sure, both are less convenient than driving but so is paying $35-$40 to fill up my car every other week. I know people who live closer to school than I do yet still drive in every day. I think that the only truly inelastic good is food (and maybe shelter).

Oil Prices

At current gas prices it costs me over 4% of my monthly income to fill up my gas tank once ($60). That is silly. I'm no rich republican able to foot the burden of gas taxes. I can hardly foot the burden now. I do it mostly by not driving. Because I can't afford to fuel my automobile.

GM Rebound?

GM's sales are up 12%, but it posted a huge 2nd quarter loss. The market reacted well to this news since GM seems to be more successful than expected. The losses are mostly from one-time restructuring and buyout costs. Hopefully, they can turn it around and get out of the hole they and the unions have dug.

Oil Prices

Robert Samuelson considers an oil bubble and the reason for high prices.

As he mentions demand is pretty inelastic, so his suggestion that there should be higher gas taxes is probably not a good idea, but others such as Charles Krauthammer argue for higher gas taxes as well.

As he notes, despite high prices, gas is still only 4% of disposable income. So, while we cringe at a $3 gallon of gas, it is not that bad yet, and there are legitimate reasons for the rise in price. Some of these reasons are remediable by external forces to the market, namely building refineries and more exploration. These are longer-term solutions and they require the government to unleash oil companies which will draw a lot of resistance politically as the ANWR debate did.

RE: Bill Cosby

I like this quote:

"One of those stereotypes is that poor blacks are lazy citizens who victim-monger while bemoaning the "white man." Such a view is undercut by what we know about the black poor: Most of them work, and few are paralyzed by their astute perceptions of persistent racism."

I think the best place for proof of this claim (outside of New Orleans) is the McDonalds on Euclid. All of the black people there seem really happy to have jobs and take pride in their work. I also like that if one of the two white people employed there is on duty, I have to wait for one of them to get my food. No bowing to the white man here. And also the guy who shows up riding in his friend's new cadillac listening to some song about hustling and proceeds to walk around the dining area all day asking people for money. You know, cuz he's so hungry. And then I see him dancing at bars on coventry at night. I suppose my persistent racism prevents me from giving my money to a hustling black man, but I'm not sure what else he expects from an insufferable white bigot like me.

On a related note, I watched an awards show for the best pimp job on cars last night. It was hosted by Shaq and some other people. There were no white contestants, but that's probably because white people can't think of things like having an interior of a hummer be made entirely of alligator and ostrich skin or driving your "Snoop DeVille" with a chandelier or even having a paint job that cost more than I make in a year. From what I could tell, black people seem pretty well off. I don't know what they're complaining about.

The bad kind of pork

I know you didn't think such a thing existed. If this bill in the Senate passes, the fight against the bad kinda pork might be underway. The bill proposes an easy-to-search website that lists all recipients of federal grants, contracts, etc.

Let's hope it passes and we are restored to a world where pork is better known as a delicious treat and not excessive government spending.

Bill Cosby

...tool of the White Man.

Nick vs. Nick

As promised, here is the comparison. There is no question. I totally asked the Chinese kids in my lab. Same person.

Why are they blue? I don't know. But I need to finish work so I can get out of here before 9.

Look:

Clearly, Nick is going to go completely Libertarian, invent a time machine in the future, travel back to now and move back to Oxford. These recent pictures of Nick Gillespie don't lie folks. So, since I've figured this all out can I have a free subscription to Reason? I'm going to work on a side-by-side picture in case you're still unsure (you shouldn't be).

Back on "The Internets"

Back from Alaska. And Bert apparently had lots to say. My meager contribution is this: The anarcho-capitalistic economics of the A-Team. Awesome.

Also, Ted Stevens, illustrious Republican Alaskan Senator (read "moron") had some amazingly idiotic things to say about the internet. Although not a big fan of the Daily Show, their mocking of him for this is all that needed to be done.
And the Strongbad-esque "dance remix" is here.
Bless you, YouTube.

Now to catch up on Bert's required reading.

No Shame

Valerie Plame is now suing Dick Cheney and Karl Rove. Here is the complaint.

If you don't know anything about the legal process, take a look at it. Notice how vague you can be in pleading your causes of action to get into court (the claims are in the last few pages). The problem here is Plame can just harass the defendants without any evidence and draw the discovery process out to create a headache and large legal bill for the defendants.

I hope Plame's attorneys get smacked with some sanctions for filing this.

This story keeps getting more absurd every day. It is shameful that she and her husband were ever entrusted with anything to do with our country's foreign relations and national security.

Today Is Cost of Government Day

Today is the day in which the average American worker has earned his share of the burdens of government spending. Grover Norquist points out that this is one day later than last year and 12 days later than in 2000.

Federal spending growth has been greater than national income growth in five of the last six years. This cannot continue, but who is going to reign it in?

Why is TR on Rushmore?

Thomas Sowell takes Teddy down a notch.

Here is some more analysis of TR in the wake of Time's TR issue.

I know Jarrod is a fan, but I certainly am not. There is no doubt TR was a progressive although he did recognize America should wield a big stick and had a much more realistic foreign policy than the too-influential Wilson. According to a Mt. Rushmore tourist site, TR stands for the 20th century role of the United States in world affairs. This is, perhaps, fitting considering the century that followed TR.

TR certainly wielded the presidency like a big stick. TR was the first modern president, expanding the role of the office in many ways for better or worse. He infused the office with his personality. This is likely why he is remembered so fondly.

Movie Recommendations

Pirates of the Carribean, the second installment, was terrible. Another Jerry Bruckheimer masterpiece. Shame on Johnny Depp. Don't go see it.

If you want to see a good movie, I recommend Andy Garcia's The Lost City. (movie site)

I saw it a little over a week ago but our blog has not been cooperative with my publishing attempts lately. A super-gorgeous leading lady breaks your heart, but despite this and the inevitable bad ending for Cuba and its people, it is well worth your time.

Best of all, Castro and Guevara are bad guys. Hollywood forbid! However, the movie is not very political. I guess Garcia did not want to offend the in crowd too much.

Supreme Court Intrigue

An interesting tale of Supreme Court intrigue. I have always been suspicious of Brandeis.

The author makes a good point about the exclusionary rule. It really should be used to exclude bad evidence not as a mechanism to get the guilty off on procedural grounds.

My favorite line: "But if a man can’t sort his crack and firearms without police barging into the house on such short notice, then none of us are free."

Oil prices about to drop?

Larry Kudlow thinks oil and gas prices are about to drop. Supply and exploration are increasing and demand is at least beginning to level.

He also reports that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued the first license for a nuclear power facility in thirty years. Construction of the New Mexico facility could begin in August.

Could this finally be some real progress on the energy front?

World Cup, anyone?

A humorous take on soccer.

SCotUS

My take on the campain finance opinion and Hamdan? If it takes that many pages to explain, you're probably getting it wrong.

Scalia gets Hamdan in his introductory paragraph. The Court simply did not have jurisdiction to take the case.

Thomas gets it right in his concurrence in Randall.

Sadly, the respondent didn't even challenge Buckley v. Valeo's legitimacy in Randall. (not that he would have succeeded)

Campaign Finance Reform

George Will flays the argument for campain finance regulation.

Golf?

Maybe golf would be more exciting if they did allow steroids. And cheating. Imagine how fun that would be! Not the same old boring golf (b o r i n g - Slaps is right, if you put spaces in between letters of words, it totally emphasizes the adjective - maybe it should be in caps too - B O R I N G - just to fully capture how mind-numbingly B O R I N G golf is). I'll bet steroids would be good for golf. Just like they are good for every other sport. Until science allows us to genetically produce superhuman baby gods that will eventually march around the earth wielding giant hammers, hurling lightning, and having titanically competitve sporting events, the best hope we have for physical greatness is steroids. It's not McGwire or Bond's fault that Babe Ruth lived in a time when people were too dumb to know about steroids. Imagine how much more hammerin' ole Hank woulda done juiced up. Someone needs to build a time machine so we can do some tradition-altering science to test this theory out. And don't get me wrong, as great as steroids are (and they clearly are great based on results), I too miss the good old days of fat men hitting homeruns and then going out boozing and whoring. Now THAT'S a tradition worth keeping.

Golf?

Does he mention how b o r i n g golf is to watch?

In Praise of Golf

Daniel Henninger has a good piece on Golf and the role of tradition in shaping institutions.

In Praise of Golf

Daniel Henninger has a good piece on Golf and the role of tradition in shaping institutions.

ABC News

This is rather humorous.

Wow

Even I'd like this basement.

It's not easy...

...being green.

It must be a hard life when you're constantly stressed out about the fact that the piles of money you make are dependent on so much raping and pillaging of the environment.

Rockin Conservative

"Won't Get Fooled Again" is the #1 most conservative song?!?!? Really?

I'll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around

I know I'm no expert....but really? Maybe I'm missing something here about what conservative thought truly is...

The change, it had to come
We knew it all along

That's the most conservative rock song?

And he has Neil young in the second list? I'm pretty sure even if the words sound like they could be in any way supportive of Conservative government, they are not. And I know it's the second list and he's reaching, but "Shattered"?

Pride and joy and greed and sex
Thats what makes our town the best

Sextastic, that song!

At any rate, someone who includes anything by Blink 182 after saying, and I quote: "And, to be sure, it must be a great rock song" is an idiot. I could go on, but I'm too busy going through Neil Young songs to find the lines that support capitalism and drilling for oil in Alaska.

Liberalism, on the Couch

Mark Goldblatt employs a liberal favorite, psychoanalysis, on liberals.

E.J. Dionne makes very little sense...

...if you didn't already know. Today he argues for a New New Deal from progressives. Conservatives help the rich; liberals raise the standard of living of everyone else he says. Now, arguably, FDR and Congress raised the standard of living for many people. Even conceding that point, it couldn't have been done without the technological development that preceded the social works and welfare programs. This development is in large part a result of capitalism, not wealth redistribution.

Dionne's complaint is that labor markets are increasingly competitive. His solution to this condition, predictably, is not to be more competitive. Nope, Americans need the government to protect them from the market. Ironically he quotes the head of the UAW in his plea. The UAW is in large part responsible for the inability of American car companies to compete with foreign companies. American companies are staggering under their labor agreements and all the wonderful benefits they provide. Guess what? If you pay labor much more than it is worth, your company can't compete. As a result your company will never have new jobs to give out.

But Dionne doesn't want those kind of jobs. Jobs that don't coddle people until the grave aren't "well-compensated" jobs.

Griffey

I've gotta take back the good stuff I said about Griffey. Jarrod and I went down to Cincy last night, and Jr. dogged it most of the night. He let two balls he likely could have caught drop in front. They cost the Reds at least 2 runs. Cincy lost by 1.

I wish I could take my all-star vote back.

Rockin' Conservative?

“NRO is a frequent stop on my daily news/opinion surf. Its contributors are often linked by other sites I read, from Prof. Reynolds to TPMcafe. Also, I need my Mark Levin, and I read Mark Steyn wherever I find him. Hey, thanks for including BÖC in the Conservative Top 50 and the second tier, and my well wishes to the entire NRO crew.”

— Buck Dharma, Blue Öyster Cult

Godzilla made the top 50 and Divine Wind was in the second 50.

Memories of Gayness at Ashland

Apparantly Mike Myers recently said of Sean Connery, "Women wanted him. Men wanted to be him. In my case I wanted to be him, and I wanted him."

RE: Finally!

Too bad he's going to hurt his back or twist his ankle or get a paper cut on his pinky finger and miss the second half of the season...just like he does every year.

ZAM!

Finally!

Griffey finally getting it done for the Reds. Big three run homer in the 9th to give the Reds the lead and win over St. Louis. He's been playing like the old Griffey lately. This is what Cincinnati fans have been waiting for since he came to town in 2000.

Most Conservative Rock Songs of All Time

National Review's subject for the list they are compiling is admittedly anathema to conservatism but fun nonetheless. The #1 most conservative rock song is...

NSA....sort of....maybe...w/e

I can't say as I have a strong opinion one way or the other with the whole monitoring phone calls thing. Mostly because I can't say as I am really all that surprised or shocked. Nothing short of a conservative army going door to door and stringing up every Arab they find for being a terrorist (and maybe throwing in the queers for good measure) would really surprise me; and that surprise would consist entirely of me arching an eyebrow, uttering a noncommittal "Huh" and going back to drinking my beer.

At any rate, I don't know if this is true or not (or even if it applies to the whole NSA discussion) but I had been noticing lately that my cell phone service seems to experience brief clicks (half a sec or so tops) that interrupt service. I called and asked them what the deal was and was told that conversations can be monitored if certain "key words" are used repeatedly and that the clicks were likely a result of intitiating or terminating of the monitoring process. Now, I don't know which "key words" that I use on a regular basis while using my cell phone (the only people I talk to regularly are my family members) would instigate such things or who exactly is doing the monitoring, but this seems shady to me. Looking back, nearest I can tell is that the "key word" bank must consist of such suspicious words as "fishing", "school" or "treatment" since conversations with my dad, bro, sis or mom revolve around those topics. And now, just to get the blog monitored:

Instead of going to school, I am going fishing as treatment for my boredom.

What if Mexicans Were Crack?

Jonah Goldberg had an interesting take on illegal immigrants this morning.

I'm having a hard time getting worked up about the illegal immigration issue. I'm opposed to amnesty and the President's position he claims is not amnesty. The problem seems simpler to me than people are making it out to be. We need not round them all up, and I don't think anyone is arguing this despite the President's and others' statements to the contrary. I think we just need to have the will to prevent more illegals from coming. This simply means making it harder for them to find work and harder for them to get anything from the government. This will deter more from coming, and perhaps cause illegals already here to leave willingly. We just don't have the will to crack down on employers or deny illegals welfare. The courts even entitle illegals to some things such as in Plyler v. Doe where the court claimed the 14th Amendment required that illegals could not be excluded from public schools. The logic of this equal protection argument can't be stopped at an entitlement just to education.

This is just nonsense. But as I said, for some reason the issue doesn't seem all that pressing to me. This may be changing, though, the more I see unassimilated illegals claiming entitlements to the Southeast or a life in America in general and all the generosity of Americans that entails.

NSA

Here's what Mark Steyn had to say about the phone records. He makes some interesting points about how this is surely less obtrusive than other information we willingling supply to the government, that people whine when the dots aren't connected but whine when someone tries to find the dots to begin with, and that so many people's records are being looked over because no one has the balls to simply go over the records of, say, people of Arab or Middle Eastern descent.

I hope you have checked your rage, Slaps. Like Mark Steyn, I also yield to nobody in my antipathy to government, but I am not seeing the danger here, at least not one outweighed by the prospect of catching terrorists in the US. The phone records are annonymous and a warrant is required to act on anything they find. One can imagine, hope even, the government is looking for calls to known terrorists or their supporters from yet unknowns or missing suspects. I just don't see the danger of the government using this type of information. Perhaps you could illustrate some scenarios that justify rage.

Now lets discuss the NSA

Soooooo...the NSA is now keeping track of domestic phone habits of American citizens? I didn't care before based on what I understood. But this, this pisses me off. If I had a land line phone I'd immediately switch to Qwest (the only company who didn't bow down to government assholes). And the defenses from "conservatives" are especially embarassing, almost boot licking. Grow some Goddamn backbone you cowards. This is idiotic policy and most assuredly illegal. I'm too pissed off about it to be constructive right now.

Re: The Darkness

I bought the new album pretty soon after it came out (sometime last fall I think) and at first I was kind of disapointed. But after listening to it a couple of times, I realized that while it was less hard rocking than the first album, it still was very good. It is essentially a breakup album. Most of the songs are about relationships with some exceptions (the opener is the required drug-related song and is hilarious). My favorite is "Girl with the Hazel Eyes." Maybe the change in direction is due to the loss of the bass player, I don't know but he did bring a distinctive style to the band (both musically and otherwise). His Southern Highway will be missed.

In other music-related news, a long time ago Nick reccomended RHCP's "Californication" as a good album. And finally, I get around to seconding him on that. I just recently listened to the whole album (like 5 times in a row) and will say that despite the radio overplay of about 1/3 of the songs it is indeed a very good complete album.

And another plug for Neil Young's (less) new album "Prairie Wind" and the concert movie that goes with it. Very enjoyable. And not crazy at all.

New Darkness Videos

I don't know how far behind on this I am, but here they are with syntheszier in tow. I've heard "Is It Just Me" on the radio. Damn my dial-up. I can't really watch the videos, but I can hear the rockin'. Don't know if this measures up to the debut or my expectations...

Plus Francis as gone. According to the website, "Francis departed The Darkness in May 2005 due to irreconcilable musical differences." I wonder if he objected to the stuff on the new album.

John Kenneth Galbraith, RIP

Well, maybe he shouldn't rest completely peacefully.

I failed to mention this the other day.

Here's what George Will had to say about the man's influence. Here is the WashPost obit.

More Steyn

This is funny stuff, Slaps. And this is even funnier.

Atlas Shrugged

The height thing is not a problem. Pitt would be alright for Galt. However, who would play Hank? Russell Crowe, perhaps? There just aren't many manly actors out there to choose from.

Best Record in Baseball!?!?

This can't last...

ZOMFG

I'm still not sure what to think about this, other than its obvious awfulness:

In 1989 and 1990, the House investigated allegations that members of Congress had sex in the gym’s nap rooms and took late-night skinny dips in its pool.

That's only part of it. Congress has their own fricken gym??? That's funded by taxpayers? Whatever. Something needs to be done about those freeloading waste of space bastards. I'm all fired up about that now.

And, and now somebody wants to remake Revenge of the Nerds? Christ, what's going on?? Why would you remake one of the most perfect movies to come out of the 80s (along with Robocop and Ghostbusters, among others)? Everybody involved in this is stupid.

Bert clearly doesn't have enough schoolwork

1. First of all, how many kids these days actually listen to Neil Young? I meant his music but his crazy rants count too I guess. Anyway, Prairie Wind was a great album and Demme's movie (it might still be at an arthouse theater near you) was very well done. And it had Emmylou Harris (who has a new album out with Mark Knopfer?!?) . Anyway, the point is that Neil has always had crazy things to say but I think he's pretty well ignored by most. But I still like his music and will try to catch CSNY in C-Bus in September. Everyone (except Jarrod, who is musically challenged) should come.

2. I can't decide if Steyn is funny or just a pretentious ass. Still up in the air on him.

3. Personally, I've always thought Brad Pitt should be John Galt. Except there aren't enough tall actors for an Atlas Shrugged movie. Everyone in the book was at least 6'5" or something ridiculous.

4. Can Epstein EVER be wrong? He's so dreamy....

Vioxx nonsense

I'm pretty sure this will be the only time I ever recommend a Sebastian Mallaby editorial, but he gets the Vioxx lawsuit nonsense right.

Richard Epstein had a good op-ed in the Wall Street Journal when the first verdict was handed down in Texas. If ever there was evidence for tort reform, this is it. How many baseless $20+ million lawsuits can a company take?

Woo Hoo!!!!!!!

The Reds move into 1st place with a win over the Astros!

Atlas Shrugged on the Big Screen?

It might be in the works according to Variety. Rumor has it Rand fans Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt might star as Dagny Taggart and John Galt.

The book has been considered in the past but never made it to the screen. Apparently there was a planned remake of The Fountainhead at one point. Oliver Stone was slated to direct that. I'm glad that didn't pan out. What would that communist be doing near Ayn Rand? Pitt had expressed interest in playing Howard Roark.

I'm skeptical that anyone in Hollywood would do this movie well especially after having recently watched the Bonfire of the Vanities. Such a great book so horribly filmed and cast for that matter.

our enemies cannot do a damned thing...

...according to Iran's President Ahmadinejad.

It's been a while since I've shared some Mark Steyn. He had this to say about the West's reaction to Ahmadinejad's announcements of nuclear tech gains:

You know what's great fun to do if you're on, say, a flight from Chicago to New York and you're getting a little bored? Why not play being President Ahmadinejad? Stand up and yell in a loud voice, "I've got a bomb!" Next thing you know the air marshal will be telling people, "It's OK, folks. Nothing to worry about. He hasn't got a bomb." And then the second marshal would say, "And even if he did have a bomb it's highly unlikely he'd ever use it." And then you threaten to kill the two Jews in row 12 and the stewardess says, "Relax, everyone. That's just a harmless rhetorical flourish." And then a group of passengers in rows 4 to 7 point out, "Yes, but it's entirely reasonable of him to have a bomb given the threatening behavior of the marshals and the cabin crew."

Funny, but not. Steyn also had an important piece in City Journal about Iran.

From "Let's Roll" to...

..."wait, I didn't really mean it."

Neil Young's new album "Living with War" is getting much attention mostly for the song "Let's Impeach the President". It's not exactly original. Think Ted Kennedy put to music. A sample:

Let’s impeach the president for lying
And leading our country into war
Abusing all the power that we gave him
And shipping all our money out the door
He’s the man who hired all the criminals
The White House shadows who hide behind closed doors
And bend the facts to fit with their new stories
Of why we have to send our men to war
Let’s impeach the president for spying
On citizens inside their own homes
Breaking every law in the country
By tapping our computers and telephones
What if Al Qaeda blew up the levees
Would New Orleans have been safer that way
Sheltered by our government’s protection
Or was someone just not home that day?
Let’s impeach the president
For hijacking our religion and using it to get elected
Dividing our country into colors
And still leaving black people neglected
Thank god he’s cracking down on steroids
Since he sold his old baseball team
There’s a lot of people looking at big trouble
But of course the president is clean
Thank God

As the erudite reviewer for Fox News said, "Living with War" promises to be an "extraordinary and eye opening new recording..." and "many parents are going to be hearing their kids singing [Let's Impeach the President] in the next few days."

Well...not exactly...

Freedom isn't free?

Here's a interesting op/ed I came across today by some cool lookin' dude with the equally cool name Crispin Sartwell. The money lines:

We want the government to guarantee our health, deflect hurricanes, educate our children and license us to drive; we want to be told what to eat, what to smoke and whom to marry. We are justly proud of the fact that no enduring society has ever incarcerated more of its people. Noting that the policeman has a pistol, a club, a stun gun, a can of pepper spray and a database that includes us, we feel happy and secure.

Our submission is absolute: We want to be operated like puppets and provided for like pets.

The terrorists hate our freedom. But we should be comfortable with that. We hate our freedom, too.

OMFGWTFBBQ!!!

In case you haven't heard, the NFL owners voted to curtail endzone celebrations. As near as I can tell, players can still spike the ball or dunk it, but can't use props. And also, they have to stay on their feet. I've come across two reasons for this vote, and they are both mind-bogglingly stupid. The first arguement is that they consume too much time, making the game longer. All the commercial breaks and Joe Thiesman idiocies are OK, but not endzone celebrations. This is so flagrantly and insultingly moronic that I can't even think straight. I've tried to see the logic here, but I can't.

The other reason I've come across is that children playing football are emulating football players. So the fuck what? Is it suddenly the NFL's responsibility to raise children? You're a bunch of god damn entertainers for christ's sweet sake. No one, absolutely no one, watches NFL for child raising tips. Any parent that tells his child to watch T.O. or Chad Johnson and do what they do deserves to be put to death. While the kid watches. Cuz I think that'll teach the kid a lesson...about something.

At any rate, I don't really know where the NFL gets off pulling this crap. Especially because so many people are paying ridiculously high prices just to get into a game (note the average price of an NFL ticket in 2003 was $52). If I'm gonna fork out fifty-plus bucks to see a football game, I want to be entertained. (Also, note that that the league of fans isn't a superhero club, but something completely different and founded by Ralph Nader.) Half the reason people watch games is to see what whacky, zany celebration Johnson or Smith or T.O. will come up with next. Said Tony Dungee after the vote (which he voted FOR curtailing celebrations) "I'm looking forward to seeing what Chad will come to celebrate with now." You shithead. You absolute shithead. From now on, anyone who says what a great guy Dungee is gets kicked in the nuts. No questions asked. And that goes double for girls. Right in the nuts. That's right. And it's sad because I like Peyton. But now I have to hope the Colts lose every single game this season on account of Tony Dungee is a gigantic ass.

Worst movie ever

I'm not sure, but this might be the worst thing ever made. Not sure who allowed the wayans to make a movie after white chicks, but they should be shot. Near as I can tell, a midget steals a diamond and pretends to be a baby to get it back. Also, the wife has sex with what I am assuming she thinks is a baby. But I'll probably never know as I don't think I'll be catching this one.

commish

The point was more that the government seems to be more obviously sticking it's nose where it is neither wanted or warranted. Senators don't need to be getting involved with baseball, T.O. drama (happened), etc. I shudder to think the fiasco that would have resulted with baseball had an ex-secretary been commish. Bad enough the government forces itself into such issues without having one of their own hold the door open.

Commissioner

Condi would not have to decline. The article was quoting her spokesman saying she would decline if the position were offered.

Your complaint that her having been Secretary of State would somehow be detrimental does not stand up, I think. Commissioner is a highly political job (not in the sense of dealing with government though it can be that too as you point out with baseball), and it requires political skills. Baseball's great, and first, commissioner was a Federal Judge. Many politicians have been involved in sports.

I agree that Congress should stay out of baseball, but I fail to see how that has anything to do with Condi. I might have to object on the grounds she is Browns fan, however.

The War

I have ignored the War on Terrorism lately. No doubt many other people have as well. Perhaps we are lulled into some complacency by the war's distance from us, the lack of attacks on us at home. This could explain sagging support for the war in Iraq. Attacks continue abroad, however. Europe, even, is starting to awaken to the problem of Islamism and its own hostile Muslim population.

I have recently been reminded of the War that continues, and will continue for some time, by some articles by conservatism's heaviest hitters, Bill Buckley and George Will and by the President's seeming reinvigoration today. Buckley and Will, although never on board completely with the President, have recently been more vocal in their criticims of the administration's direction of the war, here and here. Here and here are their follow-ups containing advice to the President. The President has been failing politically and rhetorically. Hopefully today's joust is a sign of more to come from the White House, more substance and campaigning to the public. It is needed because, as Mark Steyn points out in response to criticims conservative and otherwise, no one is providing an alternative course to the present one except surrender. I agree with conservative critics who say the President is overly idealistic about the prospects of democracy in the Arab world, but we must decide what our more realistic goals are. This likely involves years of fighting, and in the meantime establishing much better world-wide intelligence to stamp out terrorists before much harm is done. Thus, the end goal is not so tangible, but rather a process that makes organized terrorism more difficult and less attractive politically.

For a positive take on the war look here. This article argues that Jihad has failed in Iraq because there is no strategy other than terror. "The lack of a viable political program crippled the insurgency. Mao’s theory of people’s war,which formed the basis of every successful revolutionary movement of the late 20th century, emphasizes a struggle’s political aspect over the military. A successful insurgency cultivates and holds on to popular support, as occurred in Algeria and Vietnam. Similar efforts were conspicuous in Iraq by their absence."

This take underscores the importance of the Media in the US. If we are winning, according to the Media we are not, we must recognize it. The mainstream media is reflexively anti-war and negative, and this has an impact on public opinion. They simply refuse to report, or at least seek out, news that might conflict with their view, which often seems like an agenda. Imagine the media's response should we need to strike in Iran.

The War will continue in Iraq and elsewhere. We must have the will to fight it. Disengagement is not an option, for the war was brought to us despite lefty accusations of war-mongering. This is why it is good that the administration has returned to the theme of the "Long War". Despite cries of about Bush's lies, a short, clean victory was not promised. What the President needs to do is summon again the American people and explain this reality. If he does not sell it to us, we will not--barring another attack at home--have the fortitude to do what is necessary when and if more is required. The President is probably right that the Middle East needs to change politically. He is just overly optimistic about how this will come about. This in turn encourages the public expectations of quick solutions.

Condi Rice is a Browns fan

You heard it here first. I heard it here. Also, she would have to decline the job of commisioner were it offered to her. Oh, Condi....

On a more serious note, I think this might be the most terrible proposition I have ever heard. Bad enough Congress is dipping its dangle in baseball. I don't want to think about what an ex-secretary of state would do to football and I don't give a good god damn what Kraft thinks.

Re: Oscars

I didn't watch much of the show, but I thought Jon Stewart was good where I saw him. It was nice to see that *someone* at the Oscars wasn't taking it too seriously.

I will mention one thing--during the montage to "the Big Screen," where the message was presumably that seeing a movie in a theater is an ennobling experience, as opposed to watching it at home on DVD, which is dirty and whorish, the actor reading the card stumbled over his line, as if he recognized the bullshit coming out of his mouth the instant he said it. It was telling. Hollywood can keep on saying to us that movies are better in a theater, but, you know as they say, folks vote with their dollars...

I didn't see Brokeback, but I wanted to. I did see Capote, and it was an excellent movie. It really grinds me to see certain writers and commentators (most of them conservative) lash out against this crop of movies in such a brazen, uninformed way (such as Coulter, but she is far from the only one). Given, Hollywood is full of itself, and the movies this year do strike me as particularly agenda-driven. But Capote, and I would venture to say all of these movies, deserve better than the already stale one-liners about gays, racism, homophobia, etc.

In specific reference to Capote: this film had no agenda, beyond the usuals of making money, and the more rare objective of telling a good story. I dare anyone to tell me Capote was a polemic on the death penalty. Truman Capote is reported to have been fervently anti-death penalty, but the movie remains ambiguous and at the same time honest. Capote wanted these men to die so he could finish his story. In "In Cold Blood," he takes pains to draw out the two killers, examine their childhoods and examine how they became they way they were. But he never lets the reader forget about the family they killed. Near the end of the book he revisits the killings in great detail. The triumph of the book is that Capote enables you to sympathize with the killers and yet keep their crime firmly in mind, recognizing that death is perhaps the only appropriate end for these men.

The movie has a somewhat different angle, as it focuses on Capote's own devotion to his nonfiction novel, and the lengths he would go to in order to finish it. Yes, Capote was gay, but that actually plays very little into the central conflict. At one point in the movie, Capote himself uses his broken childhood to get closer to one of the killers to get his story. My point remains: this movie deserves better than dismissive one-liners. I can't speak for the others, but this one deserved a spot in the top 5 movies of the year.

Oscars

I was suprised at how many of the movies I had seen and a little less suprised that I had seen almost none of the movies that were up for the main awards. None of which I had any real desire to see.

While the popularity of the films isn't always indicative of their value. I am skeptical of this year's "top" films. As I have not seen them, I will not be as harsh as Ann Coulter was.

If the questionable "top" films didn't give pause to the Academy one would think the choice of best song, "It’s Hard Out Here for a Pimp", might embarrass them, but alas...

The only movie of the year I didn't see that I might is A History of Violence.

I will say that I thought Million Dollar Baby was very good despite the women boxing. So see that when you can, Kris. War of the Worlds and, more notably, The Constant Gardener were pretty bad. I would've taken Corpse Bride over Wallace and Gromit although both were pretty good despite the anti-killing animals theme of W&G.

Pride and Prejudice was tolerable but not as good as the one with Colin Firth. Kiera Knightley was pretty good and hot, but she was wrong for the part. Donald Sutherland turned in a good albeit minor-part performance, and the guy that played Darcy did well.

Other noteworthy mentions in my book were, Walk the Line, Chronicles of Narnia, Harry Potter of course, Batman Begins, and even Cinderella Man in that hokey, wholesome Hollywood-of-old way. It seems I have chosen the less "serious" films. Perhaps Hollywood should take itself less seriously.

The Oscars last night

What else needs to be said about last night? Other than BORING, of course. And totally predictable. I didn't see Crash (or Million Dollar Baby for that matter) and I'm wondering if it is at all worthwhile. John and I did see Brokeback Mountain and likely have differing opinions on it. It did have great music, so I'm glad it won for best original score. Jon Stewart was OK as host. I though Chris Rock was funnier last year; apparently the general consensus is that Rock bombed last year. Anyway, thats about it for that.

So about this wiretapping business....Is it really any different than when Clinton had FBI files in the White House? I mean, I'm having a hard time getting worked up about this at all. It just seems to be something common from administration to administration (regardless of party). I can see both sides of the argument (I think) where one (the White House and supporters) claim they have the power already under the Constitution and it is a necessary power to wage war. The other side (contrary to what the conservative pundits would have you believe) is composed of all sorts, including Richard Epstein, who is one of the smartest Constiutionalists/Federalists out there. This side is claiming that the wiretapping power is only available after securing a warrant from a FISA judge. Which is not unreasonable. Anyway, correct me if I'm wrong. But I still don't care all that much about it.

Harry Browne dead at 72

Former Libertarian Party Presidential candidate and spokesman Harry Browne has died. I voted for him twice. RIP.

Harvard, science and stuff

On the Summers' resignation and the role of gov't in science:

Summers merely pointed out at a faculty meeting that maybe, just maybe, the reason there aren't as many women as men in the sciences is because there are fundamental differences between men and women. Apparently, Harvard faculty chose to close their eyes, ignore the research and cling to the belief that women are discriminated against in science. They demanded an apology from Summers for citing some research which might indicate their deeply held personal beliefs were incorrect. What a bunch of idiots.

Second, since the majority of research money comes from the gov't, why shouldn't it dictate or regulate where and to whom that money goes? It already does with the current NIH review system, which is why some projects get funded and others don't. I don't know if this is the best system for funding public research; another option is one in which every project gets funded (regardless of rationale, success rates, etc).

Finally, why is research into genetic differences between men, women and analytical reasoning faculties not worthwhile science? It seems to me that is a fascinating area with the potential to explain how human brains work with regard to the ability to reason. Sure it's obvious that there are difference between men and women but no one knows why some are Stephen Hawkings and Einsteins while others are Britney Spears (to look at the extremes).

Re: Bad News

Pretty sure I don't need science to tell me that women's brains aren't as analytically and rationally programmed as men's (hence their lesser numbers in science fields). I'm also fairly certain that political currents have no place in science and that it's not the government's job to regulate scientific research. But whatever.

NSA Surveillance

The question of the President's Article II power aside, Sen. Feinstein's position that such a power can be bound by FISA or any other legislation seems self-evidently wrong. If the President has the Constitutional authority, Congress cannot change the fact.

The President has some recent precedent on his side. In 2002, the three judges of the FISA Court of Review addressed the issue in In re: Sealed Case. The FISA courts had been impeding the Justice Department's initiation of new policies concerning the Patriot Act, i.e. tearing down "the wall" between intelligence officials and criminal investigators erected by the Clinton Justice Department. The Court of Review ruled in favor of the administration as the FISA courts had no grounds upon which to direct internal Justice Dept. policy. Basically, the FISA courts were exceeding their constitutional bounds. They had no constitutional authority to direct the executive branch nor did Congress. The Court went on to refer to an older case, Truong, stating, "The Truong court, as did all the other courts to have decided the issue, held that the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information... FISA could not encroach on the President's constitutional power." The Supreme Court refused to take the case.

It is also interesting to note that the New York Times sat on the story for a year. Its release was conveniently timed with debate over the reauthorization of the Patriot Act and the release of a Times' reporter's anti-administration book, one topic of which was "domestic spying". Further, members of Congress had been alerted to the program multiple times and voiced no concern. Rep. Jane Harman, the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said she had been briefed on the program since 2003 and thought it was "essential to US national security." When the Times finally ran the story and the "scandal" hubbub began, Harman changed her tune.

There was plenty of media outcry about the arguably less dangerous Valerie Plame leak. What is not getting much play in the media is the danger caused or that could be caused by leaks about the NSA program. Hmm... I wonder why...

Bad news...

...Larry Summers, former Clinton administration official, has resigned as Harvard President. The general consensus is that Harvard's feminists have succeeded in pushing him out. Here is an article pointing out the threat to academic freedom especially in scientific endeavor into the difference in male and female biology and brain function.

Here....

Sorry I couldn't just paste the link; I got this from a subscription database on campus.
----------------------------------


Knight Ridder Washington Bureau (via Knight-Ridder/Tribune News Service) Jan 23, 2006 pNA
Presidential power a key issue in debate over eavesdropping. Byline: Ron Hutcheson


WASHINGTON _ The dispute over President Bush's domestic spying program hinges on the same tough question that vexed the nation's founders: How much power does a president have?
Bush and his legal advisers argue that the Constitution and federal law give him the right to authorize domestic eavesdropping without a warrant from a court or specific approval from Congress. The electronic surveillance, conducted by the super-secret National Security Agency, is aimed at communications between the United States and suspected terrorists overseas.
Bush's critics, citing the same legal sources, charge that he exceeded his legal and constitutional authority and could be impeached for breaking the law.
Here's a look at the legal underpinnings of the controversy:

THE CONSTITUTION
The foundation for Bush's view of his authority is Article II of the Constitution, which says "the president shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States."
No one disputes that the president has broad power to protect the nation in wartime or that he's the civilian boss of the military, but there's sharp disagreement over the extent of presidential authority. Bush says the constitutional clause empowers him to use any and all available tools _ including electronic surveillance _ to guard against terrorist attacks.

"My most important job is to protect the security of the American people," the president said Monday at Kansas State University. "What I'm telling you is we're using all assets at our disposal to protect you in a different kind of war."

The Constitution is a carefully constructed system of checks and balances, many of which are intended to limit presidential power.

For example, it gives Congress _ not the president _ the power to declare war, "to raise and support armies," to maintain a navy and to "make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces."
The Fourth Amendment guarantees people the right to be secure from "unreasonable searches and seizures." No court shall issue a search warrant, it says, except upon a showing that there's "probable cause" to think that a law is being broken and the warrant seeker describes the specific place to be searched and the person or things to be seized.

Critics say Bush's assertion of power recognizes no limits to his authority so long as he's acting to protect America from harm.

Previous Supreme Court rulings also check presidential authority.

In 1952, the court blocked President Harry S Truman's plan to take over the steel industry during the Korean War. The court rejected Truman's assertion that his role as commander in chief gave him the power to avert a labor strike that might disrupt war supplies.

In 2004, the court directly challenged Bush's sweeping claim of wartime powers in the fight against terrorism. The justices agreed that Bush could detain U.S. citizens as enemy combatants, but said he couldn't deny the captives access to the courts.

"We have long since made it clear that a state of war is not a blank check for the president when it comes to the rights of the nation's citizens," Justice Sandra Day O'Connor wrote.

FEDERAL LAW

Bush and his advisers contend that Congress "confirmed and supplemented" the president's constitutional power by authorizing the use of force against terrorists three days after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Lawmakers authorized the president to "use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations or persons" involved in the attacks.

In a recent 42-page statement on the eavesdropping issue, the Bush Justice Department contended that the congressional resolution, coupled with the president's authority as commander in chief, "places the president at the zenith of his powers" to wage war.

"Electronic surveillance is a fundamental tool of war that must be included in any natural reading of the (resolution's) authorization to use `all necessary and appropriate force,'" the Justice Department contended.
Bush's critics say employing the use-of-force resolution to justify domestic surveillance is a stretch.

"It does not authorize the president to do anything other than use force. It doesn't say he can wiretap people in the United States," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif.

The critics charge that Bush's approach violates the Federal Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978.
Congress passed that act in response to abuses of power during the Nixon administration that included electronic surveillance of the president's political opponents and critics in the news media.

The law also was intended to plug a gap in the legal framework that governs federal eavesdropping. The government has wide latitude to spy overseas for national security, but domestic eavesdropping is far more sensitive.

FISA asserts that electronic surveillance within the United States requires court oversight to avoid running afoul of the prohibition against unreasonable searches in the Fourth Amendment.

FISA established a special court to deal with secret intelligence investigations, and requires warrants for electronic surveillance in cases that involve national security. If government agents need to move quickly, they're permitted to act first and then have up to three days to get court warrants.

FISA makes it a crime to engage in electronic surveillance outside the statute's framework, unless another law authorizes it.

Bush advisers say technological advances and the unique nature of the war on terrorism made the FISA warrant procedure unworkable. They say they considered asking Congress to update the law, but decided against it to avoid possible disclosure of the government's intelligence-gathering techniques.

They contend that the congressional use-of-force resolution and the president's constitutional power as commander in chief override FISA.

"It would be unreasonable and wholly impractical to demand that Congress specifically amend FISA in order to assist the president in defending the nation," the Justice Department said.

But the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, the research arm of Congress, concluded in a report Jan. 5 that the administration's legal justification "does not seem to be as well-grounded" as Bush's advisers claim.
The report also questioned the notion that Bush could simply ignore FISA.

"It appears unlikely that a court would hold that Congress has expressly or impliedly authorized the NSA electronic surveillance operations ... ," it said.

"While courts have generally accepted that the president has the power to conduct domestic electronic surveillance within the United States inside the constraints of the Fourth Amendment, no court has held squarely that the Constitution disables Congress from endeavoring to set limits on that power."

Administration officials say they can bypass FISA and use a lower legal standard than the act requires and than the language in the Fourth Amendment calls for in deciding when to eavesdrop. FISA requires federal agents to demonstrate that there's "probable cause" in order to get an eavesdropping warrant, the same language used in the amendment. The National Security Agency, acting without court oversight, says it engages in electronic surveillance if it considers the eavesdropping "reasonable."

"The trigger is quicker and a bit softer than it is for a FISA warrant, but the intrusion into privacy is also limited: only international calls and only those we have a reasonable basis to believe involve al-Qaida or one of its affiliates," Air Force Gen. Michael Hayden, one architect of the eavesdropping, said Monday at the National Press Club.

Bush's critics charge that the administration's position is an unprecedented power grab that calls into question the president's commitment to rule of law.

"Congress established the FISA court precisely to be a check on executive power to wiretap," former Vice President Al Gore charged last week.

"FISA does not contain a provision allowing the president to waive its application," Feinstein said. "If the law needed changing, we could have done so."

Senate hearings on the issue are scheduled for next month. Civil liberties groups have sued seeking to shut down the eavesdropping program. Bush says he won't back down.

___
To learn more online:
For the Congressional Research Service report, go to www.fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/m010506.pdf
For President Bush's remarks Monday and other information on his position, go to www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/nationalsecurity
For the American Civil Liberties Union's view, go to www.aclu.org
For a white paper from the Justice Department on the NSA's eavesdropping, go to www.realcities.com/multimedia/nationalchannel/news/KRT(underline)Packages/archive/krwashington/NSA-White-paper.pdf
The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution is at www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.table.html#articleiv
Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution, on the president's role as commander in chief is at www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.articleii.html#section2