Wednesday, August 03, 2005

President Rodham: I've puzzled over this a couple of times, Flyer, and I could never figure out why, aside from the Ferraro disaster in 1984, the Democrats -- the party of women and minorities, we're told -- is positively allergic to running them nationally. It's been widely noted, in addition, that Bush Jr.'s cabinet looks more like America than Clinton's cabinet that he promised would "look like America." Besides which, Clinton's big minority nod was to put Kimba Wood, er, Zoe Baird, uh, Janet Reno, or some broad (though he claimed to be looking for "the best-qualified individual") in the AG spot, but only as a beard for Webb Hubbell.

At any rate, it highlights how deep in thrall traditional "minorities" are to the Dems. They don't have to let them play, after all. What are they going to do, join the GOP?

That said, Hillary does have the personality problem, so the Kos-ian protestations may be partly honest (though I really suspect a lot of older, male, honky Dems are afraid minorities will take the party from them). Last month's Atlantic surveyed influential Democrats about the '08 election, and they generally agreed that long-term exposure to Hillary is going to turn off even some who "like" her. She might surge at first, like Howard Dean did in the '04 primaries, but then she'll start to grate on folks. Look for '08 to be another white male vs. white male contest.

Tuesday, August 02, 2005

The perils of a Hillary nomination: Kos comes out against a Hillary '08 campaign, because she's dull as dishwater boring and the Dmocratic base needs someone cool they can rally around. And someone that still has positions well left of the DLC moderates. I don't know if he's really afraid she'd be so boring that turnout would be down. After all, the first female presidential candidate ought to be enough reason for your base to come out in support. Maybe the real problem is fear that she's for real with some of her moderate/right positions (hawkish on Iraq, not too doctrinaire on abortion) and not just playing to the masses. Although I'm inclined to believe that he only reason she ever does anything is to gain political advantage, and I doubt Kos believes any differently, I'm skeptical about that scenario as well.

What I really found odd in his post, though, was this line.

Given a choice between personality and policy, voters have been picking personality for the LAST SEVEN ELECTIONS. But Dems are still acting as if the voters have the same attention span they had during the Lincoln-Douglas debates, or even the Kennedy-Nixon debates.
What? Americans have short attention spans? Just conservatives, Kos, or do you think any bong smoke theorists on the left, with their short term memory obliterated, have trouble staying awake through a John Kerry ten point plan to come up with a ten point plan to improve the economy? Maybe you're right, though. If we were all as informed about the issues and detailed plans as they average voter was in 1858, I'm sure everything would be great. Information widely disseminated at the speed of horse and average education levels pretty low, even by modern DOE standards. That's the ideal situation for voter awareness.

And the Kennedy-Nixon debate was pretty much the beginning of modern "popularity contest" politics. Kennedy got elected because he and his wife were pretty and his daddy was rich, the ultimate triumph of style over substance. You can claim that modern voters make some decisions for pretty stupid reasons (like what they heard in a Green Day song) but don't pretend there was some halcyon day of intellectual debate when the masses trotted out to stadiums to cheer the noble competitors thrust and parry with their daggerlike tongues (and your guy, naturally, won the day).

All he's really saying is that we keep losing even though we're so much smarter than our opponent, so it must be style. Let's find some of that '92 sax-playing mojo!

Maybe you keep losing because when the style isn't there and people actually hear you talk, they stay away in droves.

Flashback on Bolton: Mark Steyn's (long) take on John Bolton's nomination/appointment. From March, but very funny and very on point. Demorat hand wringing over Bolton isn't about his personality, temper, or impatience with subordinates. It's that when he says the UN needs reform, he's not talking about
change(ing) three-letter acronyms (INS) to four-letter acronyms (BCIS) just to show how serious we are, and a year or four down the line we may well get real tough and require five-letter acronyms.

Intelligent design: I don't think Bush is trying to push Christianity on anyone, while promoting the idea that we can expose children to more than one idea and worldview, including intelligent design. He means well

Unfortunately that's no excuse. This is just a bad idea for a federal Department of Education and it's a pretty dumb move politically. Christian conservatives can accept (I hope) that once the government starts teaching one religious idea, it pretty much has to give equal time to every other viewpoint. Unless you're in a parochial school stick to that which can be proven by scientific method and tell the little whelps to meditate if they want any answers beyond that.

Hat tip John Hawkins.

Wednesday, July 27, 2005

I'm too sexy for this ad: I'm not sure I can even respond to this.

From the London Times:

Drinks companies have been ordered to hire paunchy, balding men for advertisements to meet new rules forbidding any link between women’s drinking and sex. Watchdogs have issued a list of undesirable male characteristics that advertisers must abide by in order to comply with tougher rules designed to separate alcohol from sexual success.

Read and be amazed.

Tuesday, July 26, 2005

Get ready, Eno: Not much blogging lately, and I suspect I know one reason why. Eno is beginning to binge drink in preparation for the annual trip to Catawba two weeks hence. It's really crucial that you begin to abuse the body as much as possible now, so as to be used to the pain inflicted by drinking large quantities of cheap beer and margaritas. No excuses, Eno. If you don't prepare now, you'll end up like this guy.

Thursday, July 21, 2005

MoveOn in the house: Was downtown for most of the day today, a couple of meetings dragging me out of the air conditioned goodness, and representatives from MoveOn.org were canvassing the city trying to get people to sign their petition to oppose the nomination of John Roberts to the Supreme Court. Here's their beef:
In nominating John Roberts, the president has chosen a right wing corporate lawyer and ideologue for the nation's highest court instead of a judge who would protect the rights of the American people. Working for mining companies, Roberts opposed clean air rules and worked to help coal companies strip-mine mountaintops. He worked with Ken Starr (yes, that Ken Starr), and tried to keep Congress from defending the Voting Rights Act. He wrote that Roe v. Wade should be "overruled," and as a lawyer argued (and won) the case that stopped some doctors from even discussing abortion.
The elderly lady that cornered me was going on about Roberts' allowing the federal government to meet secretly with corporations. I'm not sure if this was a case he ruled on as a judge or a brief he wrote, but she assured me that he was defending an illegal practice. I'm not sure what the law is on this, but I guess her problem was with Cheney meeting with energy companies (the horror!) when formulating energy policy reccomendations. 'Cause energy companies wouldn't have anything useful to contribute to that discussion.

I asked her if it was okay that Hillary and company had met secretly with healthcare companies when formulating her HillaryCare plan in Bill's first term. To the best of my knowledge, the situations were similar, at least legally.

I'll have to dig a little to refresh my memory on the details, but she seemed to buy my argument and looked rather crestfallen about the whole thing. Like whe'd been given a new toy and it broke an hour out of the box.

First time I've seen MoveOn in Charlotte, but it's no surprise. They're trying to turn it into New York south.

Dead on: A couple days old, but very funny take on Bush nominating a new justice. On Huffington's Toast:
No, seriously, my nominee is someone beloved not just by my own party, but also by members of the opposition pres…party. Ladies and Gentlemen and Keith Olbermann, I give you my nominee…Ms. Anonymous Sources. Or “Nonnie”, as I like to call her.
Read the whole thing. It's short and quite funny.

Wednesday, July 20, 2005

Baby, Baby, Where Did Our Love Go? Bush's question to Bobby Byrd, no doubt. (Oh, and that's former klansman Bobby Byrd, by the way.) What does our resident legal expert (har har) think of Bush's pick to replace Her Majesty the Fifth Vote in the Supremes? I have a feeling that he's going to fly this one in under the radar. Sandy Dee was, at least nominally, a Republican. It's more of a gimme. The same candidate, nominated to take J.P. Stevens's spot, would be crucified on a cross of . . . er, paper, I suppose. Who the hell knows, but my guess is that this one will be quieter than expected.
Disney: It was 95 degrees and 90 percent humidity the other day. Felt like I was back in DC. To beat the heat, I took the boy (that's L'il Enobarbus) to see a piece of CGI dreck called Madagascar. Boy, did it ever suck. I'm a fool for kids movies. Love Fantasia, love Nemo, even Toy Story has small charms, and Incredibles rocked. We took the DVD of Dumbo with us on vacation in March; I bet the two of us watched it six times. Anyhoo, this plotless, wafer-thin fiasco of a movie consists mostly of zoo animals shouting dumb catchphrases at one another for an hour plus. Gratuitous example: A zebra tells his lion pal (wait for it), "You da cat!"

Worth mentioning: Every Disney flick, even the suckola ones, are redeemed by minor characters. It's like Walt's first commandment: Though shalt find a place for quality comic relief. Think of the dwarves' dance party in Snow White, the hep-cat crows jiving in Dumbo (now, I presume, officially considered minstrelsy), and Potato Head and Ham insulting each other in Toy Story. Even the execrable Lion King was redeemed (partially) by Timon and Pumbaa. Madagascar is no exception. Ali G turns in a great performance as a fairly witless King of the Lemurs. Cedric the Entertainer plays (wonderfully) his rather unimpressed assistant.

Rent the DVD for the kids, Razor, and you can watch the good parts.

Tuesday, July 19, 2005

What is Porter Goss going to do about it??!?: Our intelligence and security forces are in a shambles, yet not even Karl Rove could have come up with such threat to our nation's well-being. No, this goes beyond loose lips. Our very own White House, with the President in residence, was recently infiltrated by a cluster of the most insidious and dangerous devices known to man this side of ICBMs.

Was it sarin laced micro-needle projectiles fired from the tip of an otherwise innocuous fountain pen?

No.

A briefcase-sized nuclear weapon?

No.

Ummm, a ceramic pistol with fragmentary ballistics?

Wrongo, amigo.

No, it was much, much worse. It was...it was...flip flops! Not only did these foul items breach the perimeter of the White House, they "thwack-thwacked" their way right up the Commander in Chief, as Secret Service agent after Secret Service agent stood idly by, talking into his wrist. W, seemingly oblivious to his own personal safety, as well as the affront to his office, greeted the agent provocateurs who wore the cursed thongs (you know, not the good kind), with smiles and platitudes, while being literally a couple of scarcely covered feet away the whole time from the fanatics bent on footwear fatwah.

I nearly moved to Alaska (the only state known to be flip flop free [plus they got the doobage - Eno]) such was my revulsion and panic. Yet, I cannot give up hope just yet. I have faith in my leaders to act. Install martial law, put the meter at Red, suspend habeus corpus...for god's sake do something, but do it before the unthinkable happens: Barbara Bush mounting the steps to Air Force One in day glo plastic and rubber flip flops, snapping gum and remarking on what a good meal for the money that Olive Garden is. Oh the humanity...

Monday, July 18, 2005

Baited and hooked: Not all golfers are in great physical condition. Neither are all baseball players (former Phillies first baseman John Kruk said so, famously, when confronted at a bar and criticized for his alcohol and nicotine consumption). Neither are all football players. I'm sorry, the Fridge was a load, that's all.

Of course baseball and football are sports, and so is golf. And it's a very serious sport, as is evident from this all important statistic. It may require a different set of physical skills, but it's still as physically demanding, in it's own way, as many other sports.

And if physical condition and heart rate levels equated to good sporting entertainment, we'd all be watching soccer. Thank goodness that's not the case.

Friday, July 15, 2005

Stop the Presses!: Tiger is in the lead at the British Open, and a 65 year-old man isn't going to win it. What a world, what a world!

Imagine if OJ...okay bad example, Earl Campbell somehow made it back onto the Houston Oile....er Tennessee Titans (or is it Houston Texans??)...anyway, imagine some real old ex running back suited up again to play in the NFL. Would anyone be writing anything but "The man is obviously crazy or desperate for money?" Now, granted, golf is not a sport. Look at the leader board again. Colin Montgomerie is in 2nd. John Daly at T14. The two of them look like they should be sponsored by Arbys, not a golf club manufacturer (well, Daly may in fact be sponsored by Arbys, but you get my idea).

Anyway...again...my point (and I have one) is all this fuss over a man whose last meaningful round of golf was probably, what...15 years ago, is all so much blather. The friggin guy is old and decrepit. Yes, he's one of the true greats, yes he could beat me at golf using one hand and a length of copper tubing, but he doesn't belong on the Old Course at St. Andrews in the British Open. It's nice that he gets some lifetime exemption or something, but please, why not just give Michelle Wie a slot too and complete the mockery? Something about golf that it just does away with reason, and submits to sentimentality...or is it just a ruse by the Golf Channel to get ratings for Days 1 and 2 before ABC or whomever picks it up for the weekend?

And what's more...if Colin Montgomerie wins or comes in second, I will eat my tamoshanter.
Time to get broadband Eno: Or maybe you already have it. In any case, you'll want to click here for what will surely be your most enjoyable internet, streaming media/download experience. I daren't give it away...
Green on Sullivan on torture: I read Andrew Sullivan's thoughts yesterday on the Gitmo report and had exactly the same thoughts on it as the Vodkapundit. Except without all the smart "Jacksonian" references. I just said Andrew's full of shit and went back to whipping the naked Iraqi civilian I keep tied up in my office. It's fun, but they sure scream a lot.

Thursday, July 14, 2005

Fisking Ralph Nader: Came across a new Web site this morning, The League of Fans, a “sports reform project founded by Ralph Nader to increase awareness between sports and society.” I didn’t realize there was a deficiency of awareness that there are sports that some people play and some others watch and oftentimes money is exchanged when this occurs. But Ralph’s not the most hip and with-it cat on the block, so it’s nice to see he’s catching up. It’s also good to know that the League of Fans isn’t, in fact, a crime fighting team of painted-face, wig wearing, beer guzzlers with enormous foam fingers with which they battle evil. Or a Special Olympics baseball organization.

So what’s on the minds of these highly concerned sports fans, eh? I don’t have 9 hours to go through their “Core Principles,” so we’ll just cherry pick a little, meaning this is only a partial fisking (not fair I guess, but brevity isn’t Ralph’s strong suit, so I’m forced to do some skimming):

Sports are no longer outside the realm of everyday citizen concern. Many people, fans or not, are upset with what has become of our sports and would like to make a difference by encouraging the cooperative capacities that make the "sports powers-that-be" capable of helping, not just dominating, our society and culture.
Athletes are very popular, to be sure, but they don’t dominate our culture any more than movie stars or other celebrities. We have, in large part, become a nation of star-fu****s, but lobbying the NBA isn’t going to change that. The best we can hope for is for people to show a little good judgment
. Public money should not be used to further the profits of sports corporations. There is no justification for cities and states to subsidize professional sports franchises with taxpayer (or otherwise public) dollars to build new stadiums or arenas, nor to provide them with other forms of corporate welfare. It is not a public purpose. Major pro sports teams are private, profit-seeking companies with very wealthy owners working within monopoly leagues and should have no trouble surviving the tests of a free market.
Actually, I agree with the sentiment here. Publicly funded stadium deals are a scam and raise the prices of everything in sports, not to mention everyone’s taxes. I suppose if a local community votes via referendum to appropriate money for it there’s a case to be made for it, but, a public good it ain’t. Given recent trends in private property issues (Kelo, in particular) maybe it’s time we allow the free market it’s day on this one. Point for Nader.
Commercial advertising in sports has gone too far and is getting more intrusive, and should be scaled back. The ongoing commercialization of sports is shifting the primary focus of games away from showcasing skill and competition, and toward simply creating another forum to sell more things. This corporate branding destroys the character and virtues of sport with a commercialized vision where everything is for sale, and every waking moment an occasion for an advertisement.
Uh, Ralph, that free market thing you mentioned before? Guess what? That involves private businesses who wish to use their money to associate themselves with the leagues, teams, and athletes in question. So they can make money. The free market isn’t charitable contributions to the NFL. You don’t like advertisements, be prepared to have most sports become almost invisible or ridiculously expensive.
Fans of major professional sports should learn about the business practices of their favorite sports teams and leagues. The outdated and unrealistic romance fans still attach to major professional sports allows greedy team owners to work against the interests of fans, and to extort corporate welfare from cities. As much as fans love major professional sports, it is a pathological profit-seeking industry that cares little for fans and communities.
Leaving aside that I have no idea what “pathologically profit-seeking” means, this sounds about as fun for the average fan as doing their taxes. I can’t even figure out the infield fly rule, now I’m supposed to study salary cap rules and contract law.
It is better in the long-term for a sports franchise to work to maximize the number of fans in attendance with lower ticket, concessions and parking prices rather than maximizing profits with higher prices. Fans should be able to purchase reasonably priced tickets and concessions and be treated with courtesy and respect. Everyone should be able to attend, not just the elite. Collective bargaining should take sports fans and host cities into account. Fans should have the right to have their interests in the resolution of disputes effectively expressed, and cities that have subsidized the league in question should be compensated for damages due to any work stoppages.
This sounds like something else that should be left to the newly discovered free market Ralph mentioned earlier. Little thing called supply and demand, my friend. By the way, all that advertising Nader hates is what allows the average fan to watch games on TV for free instead of schlepping into downtown Boston and watch the Sawx play. As for fans rights in collective bargaining sessions, that’s laughable. Think the UAW guys at Ford want me in the negotiations voicing my interests next time their contract comes up? Fans have the right to consume or not consume. Watch or not watch. Cheer or Bronx cheer. That’s it.

I can’t go on with this. There’s like 15 more principles and I’ve wasted too much time already on this nonsense. Ralph Nader is a complete idiot, though, and no fan of sports, or the fans who watch them.

Wednesday, July 13, 2005

Double Super Secret Background: Because the Rove story is complicated, full of legal, journalistic and ethical questions, there is really only one source to turn to. Yes...The Daily Show.
The blogger paradox: I agree with Eno's take on journalists - standing up for a principle usually involves at least the risk of some consequences. Miller should have to pay a price, but I don't think a very high one. Six months at Gitmo or something oughta do it.

About the question of treating bloggers as journalists, I'm not sure what bloggers really want. If they want to be treated as "legitimate" members of the media, and be granted certain privelages common to journalists, they might also be subject to the restrictions of the media, i.e falling under the purview of McCain-Feingold. The blogoshpere, I think, should be exempt from campaign finance legislation because it's really just a discussion board writ large. Some people are smarter or more informed than others, but it's still a roundtable of equals. As opposed to the MSM, which basically spoonfeeds the news they want you to know and gives you no way to respond as an equal. I'm not in favor of strict regulation of newspapers either, but there's a case to be made for some legislation I suppose. But the blogosphere? C'mon. You can't treat the mighty Fauxpolitik the same as some piddly rag like the WaPo.

But for bloggers to get that kind of protection, I think they'll have to recognize they are not journalists in the same sense as a reporter from the AP.

I'd hear arguments for certain exceptions - Drudge, Glenn Reynolds, Mickey Kaus. Maybe more. But the vast majority of the Pajamas Media ought to be thankful they're not professional journalists and protect bloggin as private speech.

Da Hammer of Justice: By the way, in all the courtrooms I've ever been in (usually as a lawyer, mind you), I've never heard or seen a gavel used. This is purely a device for t.v.

Miller does not have a right to withhold her source from the Grand Jury. Grand Juries, for those of you unfamiliar, are the most scary judicial bodies in existence. They serve with an all-powerful ability to compel testimony and evidence. You, as a witness, have almost no right to refuse to testify, no right to counsel, your 5th Amend rights aren't explained or really even acknowledged. If indicted, the prosecutor pretty much can hide the evidence that would otherwise tend to call your guilt into question.

The key distinction to be made is that you're not being found guilty of anything; only that there is a prima facie case being put on that suggests the indictment should stand pending trial.

The ABA tried a while ago to re-introduce some civility into the process, and return the grand jury to what it was supposed to be, or a "bulwark" between the government and you. If you've followed any of the federal cases of late, this Miller one only being the most noteworthy example, you'll see how little credence the USDOJ tends to give the ABA.

Miller, while not being indicted, has refused to testify; not on the grounds that she might incriminate herself, but that she doesn't want to give up her sources. The argument is that the press will be chilled if it cannot interview people because they are afraid of themselves being indicted based on what they say to the press. This would be poignant in typical "whistle blower" cases, where indeed, you want people to speak out against corruption, etc.

However, the Government's case is equally compelling: just because someone, who did something illegal (or potentially so) tells a reporter details of that crime, doesn't mean that the reporter can withhold the details from a grand jury, which is empowered with broad investigatory tools. Disobeying a subpoena from a grand jury is tantamount to contempt, hence Miller's dilemma.

You can say it's noble, and it probably is, but harboring a criminal who gave you an interview isn't the best defense I've ever heard. Especially when you're making money off of that information, tooting your own horn in the process. It is not analogous to a priest taking confession, or something of that nature.

Of don't cry for Miller too much. She's got a nice book deal in the works out of this one. Count on it.
Two Cents: Viking Pundit noticed this story from Editor and Publisher:
Bob Woodward has offered to serve some of jailed reporter Judith Miller's time behind bars, and urged others to share her incarceration as well.
(Click here for the Viking's witty and true take on it.) I'll force this into a springboard for another point, though. I don't much know the law, so Razor will have to help out. But it seems to me Miller should go to jail (though whether Woodward or anyone else can "serve her time for her" is another matter). Is the journalistic shield a legal matter, or an ethical one? Ethical, I think. A reporter protects her source, right? But the courts shouldn't necessarily recognize that the way they recognize, say, attorney-client privilege. After all, a client has to talk to his attorney, to some extent, if he wants good representation. Thus the protection. But a source isn't obligated to speak to a reporter, so why should there be protection?

Look, if Miller goes to jail for pretecting her source, amen to her. That takes guts. But I have always thought that the protection of a source was something reporters did at their own risk anyway. That's the point, isn't it? It doesn't take much guts to protect a source if you have immunity from subpoena, after all.

This has become a major stir in the blogging community too. Should bloggers have any kind of protection? Sure, and anybody with a crappy webpage can defy a court order. I like the idea of credentialing a few bloggers for political conventions and suchlike, but I've never been a big enough fan of journalists to want to live in a world where everyone is one.

Put Miller in the clink.

Tuesday, July 12, 2005

9/11 Meomorial: Latest update from the "Take Back The Memorial" group, interested in preserving ground zero as a tribute to those who died on 9/11 rather than turn it into a cultural center. And by "cultural" center, I mean a stage for the left to blame America for every problem in the world. Here's a quote from LMDC chair Tom Bernstein:
"Its cultural and educational programs will make the Center a place of lively and important dialogue – a new and permanent “Public Square” on hallowed ground -- where matters of public concern will be placed in new light. Cultural and educational programming will include university-sponsored seminars and lecture series, civic conferences and workshops, films and film series, symposia relating to historical and contemporary freedom issues, and a wide range of Lower Manhattan local community events."
Lovely idea that, local community events on what is essentially a giant graveyard. And NYC could use another Tribeca Film Festival, maybe a 24/7/365 screening of Farenheit 9/11 and Motorcycle Diaries.

What other hallowed sites in America could become such "Public Squares?" Gettysburg? Perfect for "lively and important dialogue" about slavery reparations. Pearl Harbor? Let's stir up a little international understanding discussion inside the memorial to the USS Arizona. We could go on and on, at home and around the world. The Berlin Wall. Aushwitz.

I guess politics must intrude on everything today.

Friday, July 08, 2005

Possible history in the making: 15 year old Michelle Wie is currently 1 shot inside the cut line at the PGA Tour's John Deere Classic. If she can do it, she'll be the first woman (I think) 60 years or so to finish in the money at a men's event (though she's an amateur so she can't collect).
Cast your votes now: Greatest philospher of all time.

Big deal. Like anybody ever made a buck on it. Ever met someone who inherited a big "logical positivist" fortune? I didn't think so.

London reaction: Some concern at Hog on Ice and Moxie that there's too little outrage in blogdom at the London Terrorist attacks. Possibly. I had little to say about it yeterday and little today. It's horrible, it's shocking but not surprising, I hope Britian reacts like America after it was attacked, not Spain after it was attacked. Others are saying them loudly and I have little new or original to add. At times like this, best to leave it to better writers than I.

Here's Hitchens, one of the best.

Thursday, July 07, 2005

There's gold in them thar desktops: So, here's a little money-making idea for you: Buy some computers, log onto the internet and create a few accounts with some MMORPG. Then, using either your own know-how, or some that you purchased, hire off-shore workers at less than a dollar/hour to run small macro programs to accumulate virtual gold and other items. Then turn around and sell that virtual gold or equipment in the real world to geeks with real money who would rather pay for that stuff (or even accounts with characters that have high levels). It's sort of like being an 18 year-old drop out who can buy the life of a 24 year-old rock star - instantly.

Think that would never work? Think again: this industry rakes in an estimated $500MM annually and it's only growing.

I am continually amazed at how money is made in our world.
How American are you:
You Are 85% American
You're as American as red meat and shooting ranges.
Tough and independent, you think big.
You love everything about the US, wrong or right.
And anyone who criticizes your home better not do it in front of you!

I'm pretty damn American, I guess.

"For God's sake, please just stop": Will Collier noticed a pair of interesting reactions in an interview in Der Spiegel: A Kenyan economist's reaction to how much the West "cares" about Africa (in light of the G8 and all the Live 8 noise about it), and his interviewer's reaction to that opinion. Read up.

Wednesday, July 06, 2005

30 Days In The Hole: I spent a good portion of Saturday night arguing with a friend who, though a charming and lovely gal when not showing her fangs, is a thoroughgoing socialist who appears to buy into any and all hype that might cast a pall on Bush, Republicans, capitalism and America. Our argument ranged all over, spending way too much time on the Patriot Act. Typical weekend fun for a lone conservative in a sea of liberalism.

I bring this up only so I can mention how enthralled my friend was with the new tv show 30 Days, created by Morgan Spurlock, of Supersize Me fame. His movie, made to shame McDonalds for selling too much food for too little money (how shocked would our forebears be at that horror) was so intellectually dishonest it should have been screened at Live8 to enhance the multimedia aspect of the anti-capitalist mind meld. His new show's premise is to take people out of their normal life and force them to live in a different environment for a month. The example given was putting a bible thumping Christian male (who, naturally, thinks all Muslims are al Quaeda operatives, because don't all white men think that) and put him in the home of an American Muslim family and force him to adapt to their life, religion, etc. This was meant to promote cross-cultural understanding, naturally. Antoher episode apparently makes a millionaire live on minimum wage for a month. The horrors of basic cable and, oh yeah, supersized fries.

I'd have no problem with Spurlocks premise, 'cause you know I'm all about understanding, if I detected at least a little intellectual balance. For instance, what are the chances that he'll do a show where a radical Wahabi potential shoe-bomber gets to spend some time with a typical American family, so full of cultural tolerance and moral equivalence that he might see the error of his ways. Wouldn't that kind of understanding do more good. Or how about an episode where a minimum wage family gets a month in the Hamptons. Encouragement to work hard and be successful, maybe, a nice vacation at least.

But the point, no matter what Spurlock says, isn't understanding, it's shame. Upper class, white Christians should be ashamed at their material excess. And for having a religion that doesn't demean women, or not enough anyway. Or, I guess, the point is really Spurlock making a buck by participating in the same capitalist system he denigrates and selling out to the same big businesses he loathes.

How delighted I am, then, to see the new Morgan Spurlock Watch, a blog by none other Fauxpolitik favorite Radley Balko. I'm looking forward to this with great anticipation. Let the debunking begin.

No wonder NYC lost: First of all, the only people who end up truly happy about hosting the Olympics are a) the corrupt government and local IOC officals who can sop up the largesse and dole out favors like Vito Corleone on meth; and b) the contractors who will get major work contracts, that are like guaranteed to be paid in full, and with no expense spared to get the job done quickly, if not necessarily correctly.

People who live in these cities appear to be excited at first, because, they feel like it's appropriate, but when reality sets in that their daily lives will be in turmoil for several years as the streets are torn up, they start to question what good all this does for them. Have fun Londoners.

Still, there's an amount of prestige and bravado that goes along with the winning bid, and it seems to me that NYC fell short of its best efforts. First of all, the best Bloomberg can do for the last minute rally is Hillary and Ali? Why not just bring out Dinkins and Bernard Goetz?? "Come to NYC, the City that is stiff, awkward and likely to stab you with a screwdriver!"

Second, if your "local" NFL team can't even figure out where to put a stadium, then what makes you think you can get like three or four major venues built in an island that is ummm, rather full-up? The only way this would have worked was to get The Donald involved, but he was too busy with the non re-design of the Twin Towers -- another joke for those who thought the City could be event-ready.

Last, in our post-911 days, the security in NYC would have been tighter than [insert laughable analogy involving virginity, stinginess or plastic surgery receipient]. And you know all about that. Ha!

Cheerio, tip-tip, and good f*cking luck.

Tuesday, July 05, 2005

Live8: So much idiocy, so little time. Fortunately Mark Steyn has it wrapped up and ready to order.

Africa is a hard place to help. I had a letter from a reader the other day who works with a small Canadian charity in West Africa. They bought a 14-year-old SUV for 1,500 Canadian dollars to ferry food and supplies to the school they run in a rural village. Customs officials are demanding a payment of $8,000 before they'll release it.

There are thousands of incidents like that all over Africa every day of the week. Yet, throughout the weekend's events, Dave Gilmour and Co were too busy Rocking Against Bush to spare a few moments to Boogie Against Bureaucracy or Caterwaul Against Corruption or Ululate Against Usurpation. Instead, Madonna urged the people to "start a revolution". Like Africa hasn't had enough of those these past 40 years?

Friday, July 01, 2005

O'Connor and the court: What promises to be a long, excruciting fight for the court has begun. Perhaps Rhenquist will retire next week, perhaps next year. But it's coming sooner or later and certainly within Bush's current term. John Paul Stevens, the most elderly justice at 85, I believe, has got to kicking around the idea of early retirement, buying that Harley and heading for a warmer climate. And now Radley tosses out this "wildcard" on Souter.

Here's a wildcard for you: I have it on reasonably good authority that an unlikely retirement might be on the way, too. A Supreme Court insider told me several weeks ago that Souter may well retire. He apparently told friends and family that he has always planned to step down upon turning 65, and that he'd rather return to New Hampshire year-round than continue to spend time in D.C. He's 65 now.

If that happens, remember where you read it first. If it doesn't happen, just pretend I never wrote it.

Grain of salt, of course. But is it possible Bush could wind up appointing not just 1 or 2, but as many as 4 justices to "The Bench?" I'll remain optimistic for the time being, in hopes that his nominations will run towards proponents of a federal govenrment with limited powers, but given the administration's stance in several of the recent SCOTUS decisions, I don't know what to think. What will totally sicken me, though, is having to listen to endless talk about abortion in the next few months/years. Nothing makes me want to throw up my hands to both sides and give up rational discourse like a good abortion debate.

Can you say "nuclear option"?: Don't look now, but a Supreme Court Justice is retiring. And it's not Rhenquist.
It's Not Just Me: Eno and I love to go back and forth on what we think people should be wearing, given that we are ourselves, pinnacles of sartorial splendor. My particular rant is the flip-flop as office wear; Eno tends to mock me, but I know it's just his way of agreeing with me.

Well, I was pleased to read on Slate today, a woman's impassioned, yet well-reasoned, plea to all of us to avoid the pitfall of summer sloth, and at least pretend to try. To wit:

If you have left your home in the past few weeks, you have no doubt witnessed some of the season's more common missteps: exposed bra straps; bare, bulging midriffs; bad sandals. And you may have asked yourself why the first warm days of the year are like a Halloween costume party—a chance for people to wear whatever (or however little) they desire.


As you might anticipate, most of her ire (really, it's more like frustration) is directed at the fairer sex, yet she does not spare us either:

Any discussion of shorts must eventually lead to the subject of men, the style's most enthusiastic proponents. I was once categorically against the phenomenon of men in shorts, but after listening to the impassioned pleas of several male friends, who point out that shorts are the masculine equivalent of the sundress and that jeans will lead to heat stroke, I have come around—sort of. Shorts are acceptable if they hit somewhere mid-thigh; among the most frightening of summer sights are men who have taken the notion of shorts far too literally. Shorts should also be neat and free of holes. This means don't truncate your college jeans in an attempt to emulate Tom Cruise in Endless Love. Summer is not, as many men think, an opportunity to get some use out of one's grungiest, most tattered clothing.
She also spend some words decrying the "mandal," discussed in these pages some time ago.

But, as any such column must, she saves the best for last with the flip-flop (the step-cousin to the mandal):

As for flip-flops, the sandal's plastic cousin, these are office-appropriate only if your co-workers don't mind that you sound like a metronome as you walk. Finally, with barely an inch between the wearer's feet and filthy city or suburban streets, flip-flops can be a health hazard. A friend gave them up after an audacious rat scuttled over her exposed foot. And when, one summer night on the subway platform in New York City, a street musician took one look at my dusty toes and began to improvise a song with the refrain "Lovely Girl With Dirty Feet," I vowed to save the flip-flops for the beach.


I could not have said it any better.

Thursday, June 30, 2005

Concept Albums, Schmoncept Albums: Flyer knows how to draw me out. I should really be getting ready for the show, but I can't resist.

Best one I can think of is Mussorgsky's Pictures at an Exhibition (either Mussorgsky's original for piano, or Ravel's orchestration, though I honestly prefer the latter), a series of musical sketches, each one based on a different work (watercolors, I think) of artist Victor Hartmann. The suite itself is a musical "walk" through the gallery, including a recurring promenade theme that represents the walk from picture to picture, instrumentally influenced by the subject matter. Just effin' brilliant.

Other oddballs that make my sun shine include Pete Townshend's White City, Lou Reed's loosely conceptual New York, Joe Jackson's Heaven and Hell (featuring a fantastic workout on moralizers called "Right"), perhaps Tom Waits's Blue Valentines.

Pet Sounds? Sgt. Pepper? I guess both could be thought of as concept albums, but only in the context of their day. Pet holds together musically more than conceptually (and, let's be frank, the lyrics are generally pretty dumb). And the Beatles open and close Pepper as a concept, but in between, it's clear that the real theme is four blokes flying by the seats of ther pants, improvising madly.

Juliet Letters is an inspired choice, though I can understand why some hate the album. I love it. Rush's 2112 comes up a lot; but I think it doesn't stand up with any real maturity, plus Hemispheres is a lot better thematically and musically. Stevie Wonder's Songs in the Key of Life is another loose (but groovin') concept work. McCartney's Band on the Run is a fine concept album and contains some of his best solo work, though the concept itself seems to have been "Let's make a concept album!"

At the top of the list I'd put Marvin Gaye's What's Going On, clearly a modern masterpiece without rival in its topicality, emotional frankness, and sheer musical brilliance, both in the writing and the performances, especially the standout bass work by Jamerson. The topicality is dated now, true; it's become an artifact of another time. But certainly not the way that, say, Surrealistic Pillow has. Nothing in it has become silly, pretentious, or self-indulgent, the way so much of that era's music has (and so many concept albums have). It is a gem that beats out everything on Green's list, hands down. (Listen particularly as the dramatic, spoken-sung "Save the Children" boils down into a nearly supernatural groove that takes off from a piano glissando into "God is Love." Possibly the best moment on the album.)

Poker anyone: Via the Swede, here's a link to James MacManus's World Series of Poker journal. He's covering the month long event out in Vegas, as well as playing is quite a few events as well. Good stuff.

Not as good as this, though, Paul McGuire's (aka Dr. Pauly) in depth poker blog. You won't see this in the Times.

I thought someone was trying to break into my apartment. I heard screaming and loud banging up against my front door. I woke up and jumped out of bed. I grabbed the first thing I could find... my laptop... and I was ready to smash it over the head of any intruder who dared entered my sanctuary. When I ran into the living room/kitchen area I didn't see anyone. I put down the laptop and grabbed an empty bottle of beer. I found a new weapon and I was prepped for a possible home invasion.

I heard another loud "Thud!" against my front door. I reluctantly peeked through the blinds and saw a black guy lying on the ground and another guy kicking and punching him. The loud noises where the guy's head getting bashed up against my front door. The noise stopped and I heard the assiliant run away. I thought about calling the front desk to complain. It was 9:04am and I had only been to sleep for a couple of hours. I picked up the phone and told the girl who answered the phone about the fight. They said they would call the police. I tried to go back to sleep. They guy who got his ass kicked had a friend who came by a few minutes later to help him up.

"I'm gotta end this shit now. I can't have people getting a beat down at my parties," he said.

And as the cop car rolled up, they disappeared. I starred at my fake stucco ceiling trying to fall back asleep. Things had been slow at the Redneck Riviera, until last night.

Moving on...
Ain't Vegas quaint.
Concept albums: Stephen Green lists his top five concept albums of all time, opening the door for all kinds of ridiculous debate. I like his idea, and some of his choices, but I don't think I'm qualified to judge I'm Breathless or Magnolia. Just never really listened to either.

I'd have to add Pet Sounds to my list. And I disagree a little with his point about Sgt. Pepper's. Maybe it doesn't stand up as well over time as some other Beatles albums, but, at least to me, it's only value is as an album. "(L)istening to a couple of favorite cuts on the radio now and then..." doesn't satisfy my Sgt. Pepper's jones. That need, which has, admittedly, dwindled considerably over the last decade, can only be met with the whole album. But that's just me.

Also, though I'm likely to get raked over for this one, I liked Elvis Costello's Juliet Letters*. Nowadays every act thinks it can make themselves serious artists if they hook with the Poughkeepsie Pops and put out a live version of a bad rock song with some confused bassoonists and second chair violin stand-ins. Elvis actually teamed up with a classical quartet to write an album of songs suited to the instruments involved, but melded his distinctly non-classical voice to create something very different. And it's as "conceptual" as you can get.

Go ahead and fire away, boys. If this doesn't bring out some heated argument, nothing will.

*Eno will no doubt point out that I'd think Costello warbling his grocery list into a soup can on a string would make a great concept album. I'm a fan. Guilty.

Tuesday, June 28, 2005

Helpful hints on how to avoid shark attacks: In light of the recent "spate" of shark attacks (notice how no one acts surprised if a person wandering around the African savannah is killed by a lion/leopard/cheetah, but once a person is bitten by the most evolutionary perfect killing machine in its own habitat - it's national news), we here at FauxPolitik want to do our civic duty and offer you some safety tips on how to avoid being bitten and/or killed by a shark*:

1. Avoid wearing freshly cut tuna pieces as beach fashion accessory.

2. While body surfing, do not go on and on and on about how great a director Steven Spielberg is, and wow, did he ever coax a great performance out of Roy Scheider, a true movie hero if there ever was one.

3. Sandals with socks. Known shark attractant. Ever seen a German make it out of the ocean alive? Neither have I.

4. If you do see a shark coming right at you, take out your survival knife, wield it in the classic underhand commando grip, crouch, then reach out and slice the nearest person to you who looks like s/he is a slower swimmer, and then go like hell for the shore. It helps if you distract that person with a comment about the pretty dolphins right before the cut.

5. Wear killer whale costume when venturing past surf break. Sharks don't fuck with killer whales. Use squeeze bottle to approximate blow hole clearing. Eat mullet or herring thrown to you by friend/spouse dressed as Sea World trainer (do not forget whistle; sharks notice detail).

6. Don't swim in ocean.

There you have it. We hope this has been helpful. Remember sharks don't kill people, Michael Schiavo does.


*Note, this only applies whilst in the water. If a land shark comes knocking on front door, you're on your own.
Dog bites man: Radley, 17-25 year old "Young Republicans" can rarely explain why they do anything. They are, as their name suggests, young. I don't think it's fair to use the statements by a few kids with no experience or really much understanding of the issues at hand (with exceptions among the age group, to be certain) to implicitly support an argument ("chickenhawk") that is a lot more complicated.

Many young people don't always know why they make certain choices, to go to college, to war, to follow Phish. Often, in fact they find out down the road they wish they had made a different choice. One need not, then, have served in the military to make judgements about military matters, as those decisions are made in youth, on the advice of parents, teachers, and a host of other influencers. I think there's an argument to be made that civilians, both current and lifelong, may be better qualified to make final judgements about going to war - they may be better and more broadly educated, they don't have as much potential for bias towards particular branches, divisions, or individuals within the military as a whole, they haven't been "scarred" by emotional trauma that, due to its personal and tragic nature, is not helpful in rendering sound judgement on use of force.

I gather you disagree, and that's fine. I think there's plenty of genuine hypocrisy worth pointing out, and there may be some who fit the chickenhawk description. But it's not fair to use a bunch of dopey, MTV-addled teenagers as examples of the larger pool of Iraq war supporters who don't/didn't serve in the mlitary. Use them as cause to raise the voting age, maybe.

Monday, June 27, 2005

Enough with the Supreme Court decisions: Any more court talk and this is going to start sounding plausible.
On China: Daniel Drezner had this post last week on the effects of an open economic policy with China in regard to creating a society more respectful of human rights and civil liberties. Inconsistent reluts, to be sure, and those coming at the speed of Darwinian evolution.
By the Freedom House measures, China has been rated as "not free" for the entire history of our expanded trade relationship with them. Within that category there are some subtler trends -- in the eighties both the poliitical rights and civil liberties measures improved slightly. Both went back down after Tiannamen, and then since 1998 the civil liberties score has improved marginally.
Not the most encouraging news, especially not in light of recent policies on registration of blogs and other intenet sites. Drezner cites several reasons that an open policy may be working, if slowly, and that to the extent that it's not China may be an exception to the rule because of their size and the particular nature of President hu Jintao's rule. I'm not expert enough to say if he's right or not, but I'm not very confident that we'll see any social effect of our economic policy very soon. Drezner makes at least one very good point, though.
Third, when questioning the utility of a certain policy, one always needs to compre it to the alternative set of options. There is no other option that would cause China to democratize any faster that a policy of openness.
Of course, we could democratize China in a hurry if we wanted to, like we did Japan in 1945. But I think Drezner's point is that with any policy aimed at achieving a particular goal, there are some tradeoffs involved. In this case, the tradeoffs are speed and the certainty that they could choose as their leader someone who's personal ambition supercedes their willingness to relinquish power to individuals and more local institutions. In exchange, we don't have to go to war with 1.3 billion Chinese. Conservatives are hardwired to understand tradeoffs, so I'm willing to agree that the current course of action is the best and maybe the only practical one we can take towards China. I just wonder how realistic we're being in our expectations.

Friday, June 24, 2005

Tribute to Jeff Goldstein:

Recently Jeff did a marvelous bit of short [short being relative] fiction using a literary version of the quick-shot film technique a la Michael Bay, et al. Anyway, very amusing. Here is my tribute, in a few "short" paragraphs...

Carnie rose early. Well, "rose" put a bit too much shine on the mealy apple. Maybe this is would be more accurate: "Carnie opened one grime-encrusted eye and simulataneously fell from the roof of the tar-paper chicken coop, dragging nearly half the roof with him."

The point is he was awake. Groaning, gasping...but awake.

****************

Baby walked through the corn field, humming her momma's favorite tune. The wind was light, barely bending the tops of the stalks, which seemed to move with Baby, as if engaged in a slow country waltz. That must be because Baby didn't eat corn (not even corn bread), and the stalks knew they could trust her. The familiar tune stopped suddenly as she broke into a clearing in the corn about 20 yards in diameter. "What in the world?" Baby thought to herself. She slowly circled around the object, only touching it after she'd seen all sides of it. "Why...that looks like one of them catty-pults from Carnie's books."

****************

Carnie rose (this time for real) off the ground, wincing, patting off the dust, feathers and the rest. He looked back to the corn field...then to the giant stack of hay bales a few yards past the chicken coop. "More ballast next time," he thought.
What Would Jesus-as-Zombie Do?: Much ado is being made over Romero's latest zombie flick, "Land of the Dead" -- this time done with at least a modicum of a budget (around $15MM to $18MM).

The above link will give you the fan-boy's perspective, but what about the more spiritual among us? What would a good Christian think about the newest installment in the zombie oeuvre??

Well, quite a bit, and amazingly enough to this blogger, those thoughts are quite insightful.

Leave aside the quotes from the Bible, and the references to "we all live through Christ forever" and you find that the message that Romero sought to imbue was not lost on the reviewer just because he is a "goody-two-shoes" born-again. To wit:

The fear of death is heightened in Romero's films by the fear of decay. As zombies shamble about in Romero's films, they have a hard time literally holding themselves together. It is disquieting to see the human body profaned.


and

In a telling scene from 28 Days Later (not, technically, a zombie film though it has many of the trappings) some of the world's last defenders are discussing the impact of the "infection." A sergeant concludes that since the human race has only been around for a relatively short time, if the infection wipes them out it will just be a return to normality. But the commanding major concludes that since the infection all he has seen is people killing people -- which is precisely what he had seen in all the weeks before the infection. He concludes that they are currently in a state of normality. Zombie movies put the insatiable lust of sin front and center. There is no sugar coating, no attempt to make sin look nice. All we see are the ravages of the horrible behaviors across the globe squeezed into a small area so that we can witness them more easily.


and

Early in Land of the Dead the protagonists discover that the zombies are beginning to organize. Many of them appear to be attempting to perform their old jobs. One human comments, "They're pretending to be alive." Another responds, "Is that what we're doing? Pretending to be alive?"


So, all-in-all, a pretty good extraction of the movie's message.

Contrast with the review for "Boogie Nights":

"What the...?! Blaspheming devil-loving.... ARghghghghahhhh! *gagging sounds*"
Busy bloggers: I know Eno's been busy, learning his lines, schtupping chorus girls in his dressing room etc. And I was too busy to even throw up a final comment on my beloved Open (Summary: great final day, but not a finish that will rank high on the history-meter. Oh well, good for Campbell). Razor must be on vacation.

I kept meaning to post soemthing on every issue that hit the spin machines this week, but never go around to any of it. I thought Radley summed up the past week(s) well with this post, though, as well as my current attitude towards politics in general.

So that's all I got. One lame link to Radley. Pathetic blog effort concluded. I'll try to do better next week.

Friday, June 17, 2005

Answers you seek, within you will find them: I'll give it a try, though.

Wire to wire: Leading wire to wire is rare, particularly in majors. I think out of his 18 professional major titles, Nicklaus won something like 4 or 5 of them wire to wire, and there aren't many who even approach his ability. So who cares who's leading after Rd. 1? Because it's still the only way to tell who's got the best chance to be in the hunt. The saying goes, you never win the tournament on Thursday, but you can lose it. They're just trying to get in position and try to improve a little every day. Whythe media breathlessly reports anything, though, you'll have to ask them. It has nothing to do with golf, though. Or sports. They're just naturally breathless.

Course setup: There's nothing wrong with making the course play hard, and specific holes play really hard, but there's a point of diminishing returns for enjoyable viewing, and the USGA is attempting to entertain viewers either at the event or on tv. When the best in the world are playing, I want to see a tough course that still rewards good shotmaking. If I wanted to watch someone five putt, I'd play golf with Eno. I don't want to see a train wreck. It may be fair that everyone on the train dies, but it's no fun to watch.

Daly: He only wishes he could win once a year. I think he's got maybe four or five wins in almost 15 years (two of them majors, though, so that helps). Despite being exceptionally talented, Daly has struggled in many ways. He's popular because he's an everyman, blue collar, red-neck, who pounds the ball nine miles and, most importantly, is friendly to the fans and never forgets that they've made him successful beyond what his record would have earned him. He's done a lot of things wrong in his life, on and off tour, but he never fails to get another "second" chance.

Tiger: He's the furthest thing from a robot, at least as far as his game goes. He's all over the course, hitting drives into the worst possible places, then hitting miraculous recovery shots. He's also a walking mouthful of cliches and as personable as a robot in his relatioship with fans. Can you blame him? If he stops to speak to one person or sign one autograph, he could literally be there for hours. Would you stop to chat with someone and risk offending four or five hundred when you walk away? Probably not. Mickelson handles it better, but it's an impossible situation for both of them. And Mickelson comes across as a dope, with his aw shucks smile and over the top politeness, but he gives more real answers and insightful comments to reporters in a minute than Tiger will in a year. He pays for it too, since not everyone wants to hear an untested sound bite.

Why see it live: I can't answer for everyone, but for me it's to see the course. They look totally different live than on tv. And I can't get out of work to watch tv. But as far as actually seeing the event, tv coverage is much better than trying to watch it live, so I almost never attend these things on the weekend when it will matter.

The Open: Attended my first U.S. Open round yesterday, and had a great experience. A few thoughts on the day and the tournament.

The U.S. Open is the most well run event of that size I've even been to. From 7 am to 6 pm we never waited for more than a minute. Not to park, get on the shuttle bus, get into the course, get food and drink, buy a souvenir, get back on the shuttle bus, get out of the parking lot, nothing. And there had to be at least 50,000 people there. They had two large parking lots, one north side, one south. The north lot, where we were, had 100 buses shuttling people to and from, and it made a big difference. But the entire event was like that. The football field size merchandise tent was packed, but there must have been 60 or so cashiers moving people along. Excellent.

Mickelson was the name on everyone's lips this week, and a 69 yesterday had everyone picking him. Anyone want odds now.

Pinehurst is not a pretty course. It's not ugly, but there's none of the flora of an Augusta, or panoramic awesomeness of Pebble Beach. It is, as it's name indicates, full of pine trees, which are fine but not pretty. And that's as it should be for a U.S. Open. This ain't the Masters, where they dye the water in the ponds blue for tv. It's simpler here, a little more honest. Beautiful, but not pretty.

On tv, the course doesn't look that hard, but it is a killer. The phrase "turtlebacked" has been used to describe these greens. If that doesn't make it clear, imagine landing a golf ball on the hood of VW Beetle and stopping it close to antenna. Yikes.

Fortunately, the USGA seems to be resisting the urge to push the course too far. I saw them watering the greens, just a little, yesterday between groups to keep the greens from getting out of hand. Good for them. It's about time they learned not wreck a good thing.

Heat, sweat, sunscreen, and sand require an ocean to achieve any level of sustainable comfort. Without it, you feel like a walking pile of crud after a few hours.

Fans are getting too polite. Not that they should ever be rude or inconsiderate (golf is different from every other sport and this is one of the good ways), but fans are almot afraid to cheer out loud sometimes. There was a lot of obnoxious fan behavior when Tiger Woods turned pro and took the popularity of golf to a new level, but the backlash seems to have taken some of the fun out of the experience. Considerate fans don't want to distract the players during a swing, but surely cheering them on when they're walking off the teebox is still inbounds, right. Some players have a reputation for acknowledging their fans and showing appreciation for the cheers, Mickelson being the biggest example today, but others you feel like you're bugging them. I think the problem is part of the celebrity/sports obsessed culture we live in, where some fans don't know where to draw the line, and golf is just the latest to be affected. But Arnolf Palmer never walked up a fairway staring at the ground, ignoring the fans around him. He always took time to wave, nod, show some recognition of the people who make it possible for him to fly in private jets and play a game for a living. Today's players need to be more like him. And gas should cost a nickel a gallon, right?

My pick of Justin Leonard as dark horse doesn't look too good. I gues it's time to confess: I have no idea who will win from one week to the next. I never would have picked Rocco Mediate and Olin Browne to be the leaders after Round 1. I don't think either of them will win. I may be wrong again. Me, I'd watch Retief Goosen real close today. But, you know, it's all just guessing.

Holla: Thanks. Now on to your bete-noir: golf. First of all, why do the papers, websites and newscasters always breathlessly report who is on the lead after day 1? Or even day 2, for that matter? How often does someone go wire-to-wire in a golf tourney, much less a Major? Like, once a year, maybe? Really, it's enough.

Why so much whining about the organizers making holes tough to play? Doesn't it work to everyone's disadvantage? I mean, are we supposed to believe that gravity works differently for Tiger than the rest of them? Shut up, play, and collect your big check.

How does John Daly manage to win one surprising tournament a year, but the rest of the time flame out after the cut? It doesn't seem to compute. Perhaps that is why he remains so popular: he's the golfing everyman, as opposed to the robot (Tiger) or doofus (Mickelson). The rest are all foreign, so...

Why do people go to golf tournaments (other than to avoid work - which is a noble goal, but still)? You get to really only watch one hole. Or you can be a complete idiot and follow Tiger around along with 2,000 of your closest friends, screaming "Get in the hole!" after every putt, or just wild applause on every drive regardless of distance and accuracy.


I need answers here Flyer.
Echo: Razor, you nailed it.

Thursday, June 16, 2005

Hope: I write today on hope.

Hope can spark wondrous achievements that might seem improbable as it spurns defeatism, and nurtures ambition. It helps us, during our dark days, to pull out a glimmer, a glimmer of hope, and strive onwards, against even daunting odds. If not for hope, why would any of the Jews, who were put in concentration camps, not have immediately ended their lives, in the face of what was being done to their bretheren? They held on, using hope and its cousin, faith, believing that they would make it out, to perhaps see their loved ones who by some other small miracle, might too have found a way to hold on and walk out of those damned gates.

Hope, on a smaller stage, keeps a baseball team working its hardest in the face of a losing slump, believing that if the players just keep plugging, and a little luck thrown their way, their season can be salvaged.

Hope is indeed a wonderful attribute. However, there comes a point when hope turns. When a dreamed-of salvation creates a wildly distorted reality, and desperation and delusion sets in. See, hope cannot be abused, nor can it be used as a substitute for substance. Hope is just a feeling; it cannot, by itself, make day into night, or death into life.

I speak now of the Schiavo family, who for so long, used hope as their watchword. Hope that their faith would endure and turn what was deemed by so many (doctors, judges, reporters) to be a dire, unwinnable situation, into one that was a triumph of the human will and spirit.

But, Terri's brain was half what it used to be. It was so irretrievably damaged, that it had to preserve of itself what it could, in order that it might survive. That meant shutting down the very portion of our mind that generates and stores our hope. It had to only use what little power it had left to keep the heart pumping, the lungs breathing. It had to sacrifice its most awesome function, the ability to dream, to laugh, even to see, so that its host, which had carried it all these years, could survive; not "live" mind you, but survive. The brain, for all its wonder, knows no other way. It is a primitive device at its very core. To sustain itself, hope had to be abandoned.

Terri's parents and siblings, because they loved what Terri had once been, refused to see what she had become. Their hope did not whither, did not die. But their hope could not restore Terri's brain. In short, their hope was not transferable. Once hope is gone, it is often said, you might as well be dead. Nonetheless, their vigil was admirable, but by the end, their simple act of faith had been turned into a shouting point for various interest groups. When Terri finally passed, the family clung to that hope, insisting that a horrible mistake had been made.

Unfortunately, even today, after the report of the independent and respected pathologists, the Schiavo family has not given up their hope, even though all hope is truly lost. I do not wish to deny them their memories or their faith. I don't wish to besmirch their great, great love for their daughter, sister, niece. But, what the doctors and judges had said these many years, is now shown to be conclusively true. This is beyond politics, beyond those ingrates with their signs, using Terri as a polarizing force.

What she truly wanted may never be known. And true, there was no particular harm in letting her body live, even as her mind has died. But to still suggest that she was a reactive, emoting, thinking being is simply beyond the pale. Unfortunately, there were no miracles for Terri. Accept that she died a decade ago. Grieve. Cry. Laugh. Remember. But let her go. Let hope for Terri go. There are other people who need it now.

Wednesday, June 15, 2005

Open picks: Media picks for the U.S. Open are pretty predictable: Tiger (though not all that many), Phil, David Toms. They're all good picks, but not exactly daring. A couple guys went out on a limb, with picks like Jim Furyk and Kenny Perry (although Jim Furyk won it two years ago and Perry is a long way from the dark horse he's been in the past). Lots of people are talking about Chris DiMarco, too, which makes sense since he's been in the hunt for the last three majors. But his game's been off form the past few weeks, so it'll be interesting to see if he can peak for a major. He's never played Pinehurst before, so he best get ready.

The one name that jumps out at me that nobody's mentioned is Justin Leonard. You don't need to bomb the driver at Pinehurst, and if the weather holds the fairways will be running fast adding yardage anyway. Leonard's got a win already this year, and he putts as well as anyone. He's also got major championship bona fides, with British Open title and some other close calls, like the '02.

Turns out there's a U.S. Open blog. I'll have to check it out.

Tuesday, June 14, 2005

Golfblogging: This is the week of the U.S. Open, so expect a little of my inner golf geek to show through for a few days. It's especially exciting because I just learned that I'll be making the drive to Pinehurst to watch Thursday's opening round, thanks to a friend who has a pair of tickets he can't use that day. Since my favorite golf tournament is whatever one is being played this week, I won't go on about what a great event the Open is, but I will be offering some thoughts on the course, the favorites, the play and the coverage.

For now, check out a piece on the last Open Champion at Pinehurst.

Monday, June 13, 2005

Yeah, Okay: So I went on vacation for a week and forgot to tell anyone. Well, like, that's the point isn't it? To get away, abandon responsibilities, and just drink gin and tonics? Outer Banks are lovely this time of year.

Anyway, ditto on the medical marijuana ruling. Just absurd. I love how Stevens admits it has nothing to do with interstate commerce, but cites to a 1940s case that says where the potential exists to possibly, maybe, in some extreme circumstances, affect interstate commerce ("among the states") then the Feds can come in with their jackboots. I somehow doubt the plaintiff and her six weak plants were about to threaten the Mexican cartels.

Well, I'll have more soon, but I have to catch up on mail.

Thursday, June 09, 2005

Barnett dismayed: Randy Banett's thoughts on Gonzales v. Raich are up over at NRO. He's clearly disappointed by Scalia's new stance on Federalism exhibited by this case, but he remains very respectful of the court overall (I think I could hear him biting his tongue, which is hard to hear, even if you're in he same room as someone, so I bet it hurt a lot). He's absolutely right when he mentions the importance of nominating authentic federalists/originalists to the court, like Thomas, who will abide by the letter of the Consitution even when it doesn't suit their policy preferences.

Wednesday, June 08, 2005

Commies scared of bloggers: No, there's not a revolt at The Huffington Post. I'm talking about admitted Communists, China in particular.
The Chinese government has announced plans to police web forums, chat rooms and blogs alongside other websites.

Websites in China have long been required to be officially registered.

The authorities are now determined that blogs should also be brought under state control.

Press advocacy group Reporters without Borders said the initiative would "enable those in power to control online news and information much more effectively".

I can't fathom how China is allowed to get away with crap like this. What to do? I don't know. It's not worth a shooting war and "free exchange of ideas, goods, and services" doesn't seem to be prodding China to adopt principles more in line with Western-style Democracy. People wearing T-shirts with pictures of Che Guevera like to ask why we continue to enforce a 40 + year old embargo against Cuba, but we have no problem trading with China to get access to billions of consumers. The stock answer has been, I gather, take a look at China 100 years ago. Take a look at China now. They've come a long way, and they seem to undertand that they'll have to release their Vader like mind control over their people. Economic liberalization will lead to social liberation, blah blah blah.

But if this is an indication of the progress China is making towards civil reform, man have we been duped of what. We can't embargo them Cuba style, of course, without doing horrible damage to the world economy, our own in particular. It would put a dent in Wal-Mart's bottom line the size of Michael Moore, not to mention put out of business many of the US companies that sell to them.

I'm no protectionist when it comes to trade, in fact I don't really care whether we trade with ne'er do wells and villians around the world. But it may be time to stop pretending that free trade alone is going to cause the social revolution we've been hoping for. Has it ever before? Certainly creeping Westernization helped play a big part in the break up of the Soviet Union (Jordache Jeans and Sony Walkmen feeding the desire of average Russkis to improve their standard of living), but so did an arms race that was as much about bankrupting Moscow as it was about missile defense and ICBM's.

Hmmm, glad I'm not Secratary of State. And, so is everybody else in the world.

Via MarketingVox.

Monday, June 06, 2005

A Mark Steyn must read: Mark Steyn's latest tackles the Hillary in '08 question better than anyone ha yet. Some excerpts:
But, if I had to be a bit more mathematical about it, I’d look at it this way. If the Democrats ever want to take back the White House, 2008 is their best shot. After the 2010 census, the electoral college apportionment for the 2012 Presidential campaign will reflect the population shifts to the south and west – ie, growing Republican “red” states will get more votes and declining Democrat “blue” states will have fewer. The trouble with being a party that promotes abortion as a sacrament is that after a generation or two it catches up with you: in 2004, the 16 states with the lowest fertility rate voted for John Kerry; 25 of the 26 with the highest fertility rate voted for George W Bush. In the long run, a lot of Democratic turf is looking as demographically barren as the European Union. And, even discounting the long-term prognosis, right now more red states are trending blue than vice-versa. So, if the Dems don’t win in three years’ time, things are only going to get worse. In 2008, they need a candidate who can hold all the territory John Kerry won plus flip Ohio or Florida into the Democratic column.
So the electoral math is as favorable as it's going to get for quite awhile. But the real reason is that Hillary is the only Democratic figure with enough star power/political capital to run to the right on national defense issues while keeping the left wing fringes from going into revolt.
Lately, for example, she’s been making some tentative moves away from Democrat orthodoxy on abortion. The abortion absolutism demanded by the party’s wrinkly feminist activists is a net vote loser for the Dems, but figuring out how to shake off Gloria Steinem and co is a tricky business. John Kerry was reduced to claiming that, while he personally, passionately believed life began at conception, he would never let his deep personal, passionately held beliefs interfere with his legislative programme; Howard Dean, declining to torture his rhetoric so pitifully, was practically offering to perform partial birth abortions on volunteers from the crowd. But Hillary’s begun to sound kinda-sorta-pro-life-ish: “We can all recognize,” she said the other day, “that abortion in many ways represents a sad, even tragic choice to many, many women.” Really? The abortion lobby doesn’t think it’s “sad” and “tragic”. They think the choice is something to be celebrated. Yet, unlike Kerry and Dean, if Senator Clinton tiptoes further down this path, I’ll bet the Democrats’ feminist enforcers decline to protest.
And that's before you even talk about Iraq and her remarkably hawkish position. Anyway, RTWT, as they say. It's worth it.
Six Justices in Search of a Fig Leaf: No time to read the opinions, but this seems absurd on its face.
Federal authorities may prosecute sick people whose doctors prescribe marijuana to ease pain, the Supreme Court ruled Monday, concluding that state laws don't protect users from a federal ban on the drug . . . [Justice John Paul] Stevens said there are other legal options for patients, "but perhaps even more important than these legal avenues is the democratic process, in which the voices of voters allied with these respondents may one day be heard in the halls of Congress."
Their voices were heard, you jerk-off, in their state houses and assemblies. Hence the state laws legalizing medical marijuana. And Stevens is what passes for a liberal on this court. Just another political schmuck searching for ways around federalism when it suts his aims. I'm tired of him. Somebody point his walker toward Shady Acres and give him a shove, and send in some fresh new faces.

Look for Randy Barnett, whose appellate victory this overturns, to combust here.

More: David Bernstein weighs in:

Every Justice who joined Stevens's opinion voted to prohibit states from regulating homosexual sex in Lawrence and [if they were on the Court at the time] voted to limit the government's power to regulate abortion in Casey. Why was the democratic process not the appropriate avenue of relief for the victims of overzealous government regulation in those cases? It seems we do to some extent live under a system where the personal preferences of the Justices, having nothing to do with the history, text, or logic of the Constitution, dictate when the Supreme Court will or will not intervene to overturn particular regulations.

Thursday, June 02, 2005

Is This What Wachovia Should Worry About? Good on you for pointing this out, Flyer. I agree with you that it's "back door" reparations, and that various, um, civil rights leaders who get antsy about the fact that the U.S. at one time allowed slavery can't seem to bring themselves to admit that the African slave trade existed long before we tapped into it, or to denounce African countries who still practice slavery. (Also, the UN doesn't seemed to have noticed it, either.)

Most importantly, though, let's recall that everyone who ever bought slaves, sold them, or accepted them as collateral (or simply did not get worked up that there were slaves, for that matter) has already been worm food for a couple generations. I think that says something about how silly this whole thing is.

After all, if the blacks are justified in holding hostage the great-grandchildren and great-great-grandchildren of slaveholders, who else in this fuc*ed-up world has a claim on another? I know plenty of Irish folks who'd love to hit the English up for nigh on 800 years of theft of land, eviction at gunpoint, intentional crop destruction, starvation as colonial policy, and just plain old shooting people who didn't like them. Of course, the Irish economy today is the fastest growing in Europe, while England's economy continues to linger over its lager in some mildewy old beerhouse, fondly recalling the old days when everything that wasn't nailed down was nationalized. The wheel of fortune offers the fairest of reparations.

Disclosure: Wachovia bank released a report yesterday disclosing past ties to slavery. It details profits made by taking slaves as collateral for loans in the antebellum south. Well, Wachovia didn't make the profits, since it didn't exist as such. But the various mergers and acquisitions over the past 200+ years that make up Wachovia as we know it included Banks such as the Bank of Charleston and the Georgia Railroad and Banking Co., and they profited from slavery.

What made Wachovia go into soul searching mode, you ask. Well, personal shame and guilt on the part of CEO Ken Thompson might be one reason. But it's not.

Wachovia said it prepared the report to comply with municipal laws requiring companies seeking city business to acknowledge any profits from slavery. Chicago passed the first such law in 2002; Philadelphia, Detroit, Los Angeles and other cities have followed.

The company filed its findings with the city of Chicago on Wednesday. It has also posted the complete document on its Web site, Wachovia.com.

You may also wonder what Wachovia is planning to do about their spotty past. Open their wallets, is, of course, the answer.

Wachovia becomes the second major bank to disclose ties to slavery under Tillman's prodding.

JPMorgan Chase & Co. said in January that two Louisiana banks loosely tied to the modern bank accepted slaves as loan collateral. The company established a $5 million scholarship fund for African American students from the state.

Wachovia said it was not prepared to announce a specific financial commitment Wednesday, but it pledged to spend time and money educating people about the results of the research. The company will not attempt to target descendants of specific slaves because the records rarely include even first names.

This is reparations sneaking in the back door. I wonder if Chicago, L. A., Detroit and Philly will extend this rule to companies not based in the U.S. or, for that matter, to foreign governements that allowed and profited from slavery, including those African nations that profited from selling their brothers and sisters into bondage.

Wednesday, June 01, 2005

Recently: I've been meaning to respond to Eno's "Lately" post. So here goes.

With regard to the Open Francais, there really haven't been any surprises, except for maybe Davenport willing herself into the Quarters. Quite a show by the "mademoiselle grande". Otherwise things have kept to form, including last year's finalists bowing out relatively early, giving a new no-name European a shot. Too bad Federer and Nadal won't meet in the finals. While past performance is no guarantee of future events, I have to go with the odds and vote for Nadal to be the upstart winner, as the French seems impossible to win twice in a row nowadays. Oh, I was a bit surprised to see Safin get out of the first round even, so his progress up a few rounds was impressive.

"Empire Falls" was a tremendous book, although I did not watch the HBO movie. Despite its excellent cast, movies of books, even when done by HBO, almost always let me down. My memory of the characters is more important than seeing them on a screen. One exception to that rule was "Master and Commander" with Crowe and Bellamy. While the movie was not better than the book(s) on which it was based, it perfectly grabbed the spirit of the books and was jolly well done.

Moving sucks and is enough to drive anyone to drink and smokes. I really, really hate it and hence, do not plan on doing it ever again...until they come to take me away and put me in a nice home where I can drool over my bingo cards. And those lovely sellers who seem sweet as pie when you're walking through their house, as soon as the closing table is in their sights, they become pigs. Uggh. I think squatting is the way to go.

Tuesday, May 31, 2005

Lately: I've been meaning to write about many things recently, but time has been scarce. Roland Garros, for one: I haven't had a moment to watch, but I check the scores whenever I can. I was right when I predicted, a couple years ago, a coming renaissance of Russian ladies' tennis. None of them is a consistent closer yet, but any of 5 threaten at a given tourney. Henin-Hardenne still maintains her status as the best tennis player on the distaff side, but she's really no Steffi Graf, and I'm surprised her run has been this long. On the men's side, this Nadal kid has been a surprise, but the French is the home of the underdog. I bet he can give Federer a hard day, at least. Federer's experience may pull it out for him, but you're never wise to bet against a Spaniard here.

Deep Throat: I'd suspected, based on the better analyses, that it was either Fielding or Felt, but I don't think I'm alone in saying that I'd always hoped that one of the big names would end up being "the one": Diane Sawyer, Pat Buchanan, Al Haig, Dave Gergen, or, in a giant switcheroo, John Dean. I'd kind of even hoped for George Bush pere or (the big long shot) Gerald Ford, though neither one was really enough of a player in the Nixon White House. Any of those would have been a Story. An aged, ailing former FBI also-ran who had an axe to grind in the post-Hoover days at the Bureau, and who lived in shame for (in his mind) betraying the FBI? Poignant in a way, perhaps, but something of a letdown. Still, one less mystery to ponder in the darkest hours.

The new house is coming along. Lots of painting still to be done, and major electrical work after that. Plus, the movers arrive in a week, and I haven't packed squat.

Two months without a cigarette came to a close tonight. The urge hit halfway through my second Newcastle of the evening, so I gave in and went out for a pack of Pall Mall at the quickie mart. It reminded me of when I started the habit. The taste is so much different when you've been away for a while -- stronger, yes, but subtle in a way you forget when you're reaching for your umpteenth of the day. Goddamn do I love smoking.

Oh, yeah: Anyone else see the HBO adaptation of Richard Russo's Pulitzer work, Empire Falls? I've long been a Russo fan (think John Irving's quasi-Dickensian scope, but without the cartwheels), and I thought that Nobody's Fool was one of the best film adaptations of a novel I've come across. Falls attempted a similar coup (including casting Paul Newman, again, as the absent, ne'er do well rogue of a father), but fell a little short, allowing a ripped-from-the-headlines plot twist to take over the last hour in a pretty boring way. Still, the best TV I've seen in ages. Haven't read the book? Put it on your list, and move it up to the top.