Profanely Serious

Note: This is not the greatest post in the world. I wrote it, and then blogger ate it. This is just a tribute.

Writing is a revelatory thing. Use of ALL CAPS is a shout; use of profanity to me reflects unseriousness
-Some dude

Writing is a revelatory thing. The words chosen can demonstrate flippancy and frivolity. You can demonstrate passion and anger. Or you can wow with dispassionate analysis. That much I agree with, but can we please put to bed the notion that profanity renders an opinion unserious? This dismissiveness is both galling and lazy. (Speaking of dismissals, John Edwards has apparently told those like the above quoted to sit and spin. Good. And speaking further of dismissiveness, is calling him "some dude" dismissive? Damn right it is. Deal.)

I try to not swear a whole lot on this here blog. I'm not exactly sure why, since I've dropped an F-bomb or two in my day. Partially it's that my dad reads, but that makes so sense since he swears like a sailor, especially when driving. Partially, it's that I'm not entirely sure who reads this. (Hey Boss! I'll get those TPS reports to you just as soon as I finish some important business.) Mostly it's that given what I actually write ("have polemic" and all), I worry that full on pottymouthitude will push me from "angry, but in a cute and cuddly way" to "scary."

But

That's my preference, and I'm certainly not offended, shocked or scandalized when I four-letter word appears on my screen. Certainly a string of profanities can be inarticulate, but then so can posts attempting to use all kinds of $10 words that don't mean what you think they mean.
First

Second, the suggestion that profanity is not expressive, nor a means to conduct information is demonstrably false:


Third, we aren't writing academic papers, nor are we delivering speeches or testifying in court. We're blogging. Part of the appeal of blogging is the immediacy of "just talking". To signal this informality, we might slip into a more familiar form of address. By which I mean calling our friends assholes for continuously bullshitting us. It means we're relaxed and comfortable. As much as I might like to rise up on my hind legs in court and say "Objection: The witness is bullshitting, your honor" that might fall short of the standard of proper decorum. And maybe I want to leave decorum at my office.

This isn't to say that all or even a majority of the naughty words printed on these here intertrons are meant to signal clubbishness, or embody a chosen vernacular. Sometimes they are just expressions of raw id. Sometimes they are meant to wound. But the passion inherent in all of this emoting is can hardly be anything but serious.

"Good Character Guys"

I made a snotty aside to this in my SB post, ("God hates Chicago"), but overt religiosity by athletes/coaches has always bugged me. First, I suspect that the whole point-to-the-sky thing is a less overt version of the sack dance. Yet another way of saying "look at me." Poster child for this was always Cris Carter, who was by most accounts a complete prick during his playing days. So, color me cynical when I suggest that his 'thanks-to-God' schtick was just that*. Second, there's the sheer ridiculousness and arrogance of suggesting that God cares about a football game. I'm reminded of the Chris Rock bit where, imitating a losing boxer interviewed after the fight, he says "I was doing fine, until Jesus came down and busted me in my ribs." Third, what are we really talking about here? Tony Dungy, such a great guy. Except when he isn't (via Dwil):

Virtually every article about Colts coach Tony Dungy praises him as a devoted family man of deep religious values. But Dungy’s values do not extend to tolerance for gays, which is why he will be the honored guest for Indiana’s leading anti-gay political organization.

For all the hagiography about the Colts "doing it the right way" that we've heard in the last few days, you wouldn't suspect such open bigotry. Even understanding that prop sports in general and the NFL in particular are not especially welcoming to non-heterosexuals, this is surprising and disappointing. Though upon reflection, I shouldn't be either surprised or disappointed. I'm in no position to offer a lecture or to pontificate about why Dungy has any special responsibility to gay people. But am I off base in wondering why this is both ok and not a bigger story, nationally? Instead of focusing on such trivia as a candy bar ad, why are we not talking about this great guy, Tony Dungy, being honored by a group who's main purpose seems to be to deny rights to their fellow citizens?

Which leads me question what we mean by having a team full of "good character guys." Peyton Manning just might be an asshole, but he's a "good talker," so he gets a pass. Allen Iverson shows real erudition at times, but he's surly at others and vaguely scary, so he's a "bad character guy." How do we know enough about any of these guys to say? It would be different if we had personal knowledge. I've interacted with a few pro athletes, enough to say that he's a good guy, and by proxy, so is he; Randy Moss is in fact a jackass. But beyond that, what the hell do I know? And why should I base my opinion of them on their ability to conjugate a verb or not have tattoos?


*I'm not doubting that Carter was and is a very religious man, giving his recovery from substance abuse. However, I doubt very much that he is praising God, instead inviting you to praise or at least notice Carter.

Marxist_iam?

Overheard at Steph's (warning, extreme tech-wonkery ensues):

Don’t you think it ironic that as our Republican administration is sweeping away all manner of civil liberties they are mandating business adhere to stringent “privacy” protections for the consumer. Does this not suggest that we are as more valuable as consumers than citizens?

It does indeed so suggest. Also, "duh".

Further, Megan has an excellent series of posts defending (in qualified fashion) the regulatory state, as well as demonstrating why GWB's mandated additions of zampolits to all executive agencies is bad idea, even setting his ideology aside.

(With apologies to RIA, who seems harried)

5 Things on Thursday

• Don't f with Frankie. It does not end well. Seriously.
  

• Not to get tin-foil hatty, but was the Sternbot's egregious suspension (more here of Kobe Bryant (seriously, it's basketball. You get hit in the face. It happens) some kind of backhanded (pardon the pun) ploy to rehabilitate the image of the man DLIC calls Bean Thousand? Is it mere coincidence that the next game he got "MVP" chants. On the road. In Boston?
  

• Joe Biden is a doofus who probably saved us a fair amount consternation by getting his candidacy-killing gaffe/misstatement/grandpaism early. Meanwhile Barack Obama remains awesome. I say "remains", because we were on board. (Note this is not meant as a political endorsement so much as a personal one.)
  

• How did my dentist just find me? I don't open the mail from you, I don't call, I don't write. Some might call this stalking. Needless to say, I now have an appointment in a few weeks.
  

• Speaking of weird basketball happenings, this involves the worst dive I've seen since the World Cup. What is it about West Virginia and massively hyped basketball prodigies? More here. [Update: in comments, Icepick makes the not unreasonable point that Iverson is from Hampton, VA. To which I respond in two ways. A) Shut up. B) I meant the western part of both Virginias, obviously.]
  

Chip Off...

RIA's kid seems as puzzled by the appeal of HRC's candidacy as I am. (Scroll to the bottom)

And for no reason at all, Tyge!

5 Things on Thursday

Linking is not thinking. But then, I'm a doer not a thinker. I create my own reality...

• Useful tips, thanks Wolfson.

• How is it possible that Carlos Boozer hasn't blocked a shot since December 17?
  

• Chuck Hagel, my man:

A while back, Ezra took a skillsaw to the West Wing for portraying politics as "a realm of comity, decency, respectable opponents, and honorable intellectual warfare" despite the manifestly counter-factual nature of this vision. Despite my undying love for The Wing, Ezra is almost certainly correct. That doesn't mean that we shouldn't aspire to a more high-minded version, though. I imagine that Hagel and I would agree on virtually nothing, and he would mince few words in denigrating my positions. But on this evidence he'd engage in the discussion rather than attempting to preempt it with ad hominem up ad hominem.

• Steve Nash, also my man:

Which reminds me that I need to say nice things about Jack McCallum's new book about the '05-'06 Suns. Great read, with a lot of inside baseball (basketball...) which you simply don't get in most accounts. A fascinating look at the internal psychology of a professional sports team.

• Yglesias has a good nomination for Stupidest Thing Ever Written in the History of the World, For This Week At Least. [Update 1/26/07: See also Greenwald.

That's all, we'll try harder next time.

Queien es Mas Macha Loca?

Rep. Michelle Bachmann or former Rep. Katherine Harris?

Is there a law of thermodynamics which requires that the level of crazy in Congress remains constant?

(H/T - TIM)

Who Wants

To Sex Mutombo?*

This guy!

Dikembe Mutombo grew up in Africa, amid great poverty and disease. He came to Georgetown University on a scholarship to study medicine — but Coach John Thompson got a look at Dikembe and had a different idea. Dikembe became a star in the NBA, and a citizen of the United States. But he never forgot the land of his birth — or the duty to share his blessings with others. He has built a brand new hospital in his hometown. A friend has said of this good-hearted man: “Mutombo believes that God has given him this opportunity to do great things.” And we are proud to call this son of the Congo our fellow American.

*(for the non-hoopsfiles, background:

Possibly the greatest contribution to the game by Dikembe Mutombo may be the phrase, "Who wants to sex Mutombo?" To quote The Mighty MJD, "Dikembe walked into a Georgetown bar one night [in the early '90s], the entire place stopped to look at him, and in response, Mutombo just yelled out, "WHO WANTS TO SEX MUTOMBO?!"

so for the second time today, If You Don't Know, Now You Know.)

Update: caption contest, get your red hot caption contest...

The Part I Agreed With (SOTU part deux)

Three weeks ago, Wesley Autrey was waiting at a Harlem subway station with his two little girls, when he saw a man fall into the path of a train. With seconds to act, Wesley jumped onto the tracks … pulled the man into a space between the rails … and held him as the train passed right above their heads. He insists he’s not a hero. Wesley says: “We got guys and girls overseas dying for us to have our freedoms. We got to show each other some love.” There is something wonderful about a country that produces a brave and humble man like Wesley Autrey.

Word:

Mr. Autrey was waiting for the downtown local at 137th Street and Broadway in Manhattan around 12:45 p.m. He was taking his two daughters, Syshe, 4, and Shuqui, 6, home before work.

Nearby, a man collapsed, his body convulsing. Mr. Autrey and two women rushed to help, he said. The man, Cameron Hollopeter, 20, managed to get up, but then stumbled to the platform edge and fell to the tracks, between the two rails.

The headlights of the No. 1 train appeared. “I had to make a split decision,” Mr. Autrey said.

So he made one, and leapt.

Mr. Autrey lay on Mr. Hollopeter, his heart pounding, pressing him down in a space roughly a foot deep. The train’s brakes screeched, but it could not stop in time.

Five cars rolled overhead before the train stopped, the cars passing inches from his head, smudging his blue knit cap with grease. Mr. Autrey heard onlookers’ screams. “We’re O.K. down here,” he yelled, “but I’ve got two daughters up there. Let them know their father’s O.K.” He heard cries of wonder, and applause.

Good on you, sir.

Today's Truths

• Shoals at FreeDarko has an almost indescribably fantastic post about, more or less, basketball as a metaphor for finding meaning in an essentially anonymity inducing consumer culture. Relatedly, I mourn for Francisco Liriano by demonstrating that (shameless) imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.
  

• Barack Obama... I mean this is 6 kinds of awesome, and really, for me, this is about 150 kinds of kick-ass. But since we here at WAP are all about substance over style (except when we aren't) how much of this is playing the Saxophone on Arsenio? I just don't know enough to get excited about him for any reasons aside from A) he ain't Hillary, and relatedly B) he might win, even against John (St.) McCain. Now, talk to me about Gore-Obama '08, and I'm ready with the bumper space.
  

• KFMonkey drops the hammer on the third season of Lost _boom. I don't really have anything to add other than to call bullshit on the show's creators any and every time they claim to "know where they are going" with the whole story of the island. If they're just making stuff up at this point, I'll start a fund so that we can get better, uhm, stuff to the writers' room, and we can go full-on David Lynch on this piece.
  

• I am boring (ht: Lance:

How evil are you?

• A tailer-made description of why I keep saying (in comments) that basketball is not-especially amenable to SABR-geekdom from today's Daily Dime:

  
  

  You may never see a highlight of this play, as it did not result in a bucket or dunk, but follow this to get a glimpse of the kinds of things that happen in an NBA game on a nightly basis:

  Deron Williams beats a show by Dirk Nowitzki on a ball screen, drives middle and makes a sweet no-look pass to Carlos Boozer. Boozer, challenged by a good shot-blocker in DeSagana Diop, loses the ball on his way up, sending the ball high into the air. Williams, on the baseline following his pass, jumps high to keep the ball away from Anthony Johnson, who otherwise would have an easy recovery, and bats the ball toward the free-throw line.

  Boozer, Diop, and Devean George all make an effort to get a hand on the ball, but it ultimately goes to Andrei Kirilenko. AK-47 takes an immediate dribble toward the rim and Diop, who gets back into defensive position. Andrei bends his long 6-9 frame down to almost half his size and throws a perfect bounce pass, thru Diop's legs, to a waiting Jarron Collins under the basket.

  As Collins goes up for the layup, Diop reacts quickly and blocks Collins point blank at the rim.

  The entire play takes nine seconds and produces two missed shots, a good hustle play by four players, two terrific passes, and a blocked shot. And no points. Oh, and three verbalized "wow" calls by me as it happened. Highlights alone do not tell the NBA story.

  Nor do the stats as we collect them.

That's all for now. Theo, get it done, or JoBu is coming to get you:

Victory Is Mine

Your 'Do You Want the Terrorists to Win' Score: 100%

You are a terrorist-loving, Bush-bashing, "blame America first"-crowd traitor. You are in league with evil-doers who hate our freedoms. By all counts you are a liberal, and as such cleary desire the terrorists to succeed and impose their harsh theocratic restrictions on us all. You are fit to be hung for treason! Luckily George Bush is tapping your internet connection and is now aware of your thought-crime. Have a nice day.... in Guantanamo!

Do You Want the Terrorists to Win?
Quiz Created on GoToQuiz

(via Yglesias, amongst others.)

In a completely unrelated note, can I get a Sheik, What? from my KFAN homies out there?

Program Director, Yasay?

A Few Notes From Too Much TV Time (Election Edition)

1. Does anyone have a copy or video of Harold Ford Jr.'s concession speech? It was stunning. I was flipping channels last night, especially when they had candidates giving speeches, but I couldn't click away from his. Chris Matthews on MSNBC was clearly smitten, and with good reason. Magnanimous after perhaps the nastiest race in the nation; poetic; and appropriately upbeat - the man is 36 and clearly knows he'll be back.

Update:Here it is, (H/T Feddie)


2. I like Pat Buchannan. Not his politics (at all), but out of all the talking heads, he is the most honest. He doesn't say what you want to hear or what he thinks advances his interests, he serves it up straight, no chaser. And the rest of the blabbermouths couldn't deal with this. He alone avoids the Pundit's Fallacy. Part of the problem our politics has is that the discussion of it is often too meta - the thinking taking on additional layers of complexity like a Russian nesting doll.

3. Bye Rummy. Good riddance. Not entirely sure if this, in itself, means much in the way of 'change of course,' but combined with the realigned congress and the fact that Gates seems to be at the very least, a reality-based grownup (and thank goodness, not a fleepin' neocon), this strikes me as good news.

4. How does a state dependent on oil and gas (aka fossil fuels) elect a governor who doesn't believe in dinosaurs? FWIW, mom, I called both the governor and house race right to within 1 percentage point of the final margin. Diane Benson did well to get 40% (a female, Native, democratic candidate who favors subsistence over game hunting running against a billion term incumbent anti-intellectual redneck who refused to debate her...)

5. George Allen's quest to be Mini-Bush is getting a little creepy. Recount yasay?

What struck you?

Morning In America?

Look, I'm massively cynical about our political system. Perhaps painfully and counter-productively so. So don't begrudge me my morning of jubilation, okay?

Before yesterday, in my darker moments (becoming more and more frequent, and a major reason I stopped talking about politics in this space) I was wondering whether the American Experiment hadn't irretrievably failed. The Torture for Terror...er...Military Commissions Act was the last in a long line of straws by which we seem to have sacrificed our essential Americaness at the altar of...hell I have no idea what the purpose was unless I'm going to be completely cynical and say at the altar of political gain. To steal a quote from the (fictional) Jay Landsman, we did not cast off our ideals lightly. We hurled them away with great force.

And it's not like these actions were the result of a popular mandate. The President is unpopular, and has been almost continuously since America more or less decided he didn't suck quite as badly as does John Kerry - and the fact that it's even a question is a rather sad commentary on whatever conventional wisdom got JK the nomination in the first place. Giving massive new powers to a guy no one even likes that we know or at least suspect that he has no idea how to actually use constructively = bad times.

The rest of the world was watching, and this felt like out last chance to convince them that the worst things said about us aren't accurate.

It was in this frame of mind that I started hearing about various shenanigans yesterday morning. Being both a Red Sox fan and having only really followed politics since 2000, I was already expecting the worst. And then, it happened. I really can't describe it any other way than that. I guess the turning point for me was the first batch of Senate exit polls followed quickly by the canaries falling like dominoes in Indian, Kentucky, Pennsylvania and upstate New York. After that I felt pretty ok - the early reports of voting problems were overblown, and I was perhaps a little bit paranoid.

And now, with the human gift for turning history into narrative, I can see the TfT act as being the nadir, and maybe we can bring it back. I'm actually feeling a bit optimistic today. But that doesn't mean it's time to rest on laurels. The Dems may or may not have "had a plan" before today, but now they need to get on it, toot suite.

To go back to "The Wire" well, "gettin' clean is the easy part. Now comes life." Last night was the easy part, the new Congress has a mandate for change. Not for "change," but to put the work in and do it right. When it comes down to it, I think that the public is going to demand competence above anything else at this point. I'm prepared to accept (some) policy outcomes I don't like as long as we the people get what we pay for.

I don't know exactly what this "competence" means substantively, because that's above my pay grade. But I know what it doesn't mean, and that's more politics for politics sake. I'm all for investigations, but not witch-hunts. It's no longer enough to talk about how the current administration and previous Congress got it wrong. Show me something better, don't just tell me about how great it would be if you did.

So, Speaker Pelosi, Senator Reid, and the presumptive '08 candidates, you're on the clock. Don't let us down.

Update: See also, Ogged:

For as long as there have been liberal blogs, there's been a dastardly Republican majority in both houses of Congress. The blogs are voices of anger, opposition, and witness. So now what? Those things aren't the things we need anymore. I can't be the only person who looked at Eschaton this morning, saw that the Wanker of the Day was Rahm Emanuel, and burst out laughing. But I won't be laughing for long if the blogs don't adapt, and we have the activist blogs turning their anger toward moderates, and the wonky blogs having good faith discussions about precisely how to calibrate the COLA.

Mr. President...

Henry Waxman, line 2. Something about "subpoena for records."

In other news, popcorn futures are way up.

Cocoon

Is it over yet? Are we there? Wake me up in time for the Daily Show tonight...

Are the MFY's Neocons?

I'm with Drezner, Best. Op-Ed. Ever.:

TRADE A-Rod’s continued failure to deliver in the clutch is diverting critical resources and dividing our team. He must go. We need to move on, now!

KEEP Trading A-Rod would lead to a disaster in the American League East. It would embolden other teams and threaten future Yankee clubs. To cut and run is not an option.

TRADE Neither is “Stay the course.”

KEEP Not once has the Yankee brass said, “Stay the course.” That’s never been the plan!

. . .

TRADE We’re sending our kids to fight an endless war in Boston, when it’s Detroit that attacked us. After we swept the Red Sox in August, you hung out your Mission Accomplished banner, but nothing has been accomplished.

KEEP The Yankees never said it was over. The news media said it was over. And I acknowledge the challenges. We must adapt. We must heed the experts. Joe Torre and his coaches have said they believe A-Rod should come back. We must listen to them.

TRADE Those are the same “experts” that batted A-Rod eighth!

KEEP You would stoop so low as to attack Joe Torre? Have you no shame? Have you no shame!

RTWT

In other news, Pasta Diving ("and another one pastadivingJeter") won his third straight gold glove. Dreams do come true.

Season-Appropriate Headwear

I've seen stories like this (hat tips to commenters all and sundry) pop up all over the place:

Debra A. Reed voted with her boss on Wednesday at African-American Research Library and Cultural Center near Fort Lauderdale. Her vote went smoothly, but boss Gary Rudolf called her over to look at what was happening on his machine. He touched the screen for gubernatorial candidate Jim Davis, a Democrat, but the review screen repeatedly registered the Republican, Charlie Crist.

That's exactly the kind of problem that sends conspiracy theorists into high gear -- especially in South Florida, where a history of problems at the polls have made voters particularly skittish.

A poll worker then helped Rudolf, but it took three tries to get it right, Reed said.

But hey, that's just Florida, we already know they can't figure out how to vote.

Except:

KFDM continues to get complaints from Jefferson County [Texas] voters who say the electronic voting machines are not registering their votes correctly.

Friday night, KFDM reported about people who had cast straight Democratic ticket ballots, but the touch-screen machines indicated they had voted a straight Republican ticket.
Some of those voters including Lamar University professor, Dr. Bruce Drury, believe the problem is a programming error.

Saturday, KFDM spoke to another voter who says it's not just happening with straight ticket voting, he says it's happening on individual races as well, Jerry Stopher told us when he voted for a Democrat, the Republican's name was highlighted.

Stopher said, "There's something in these machines, in this equipment, that's showing Republican votes when you vote for Democrats, and I know Ms. Guidry's a nice lady, and she's working hard, but her theory that my fingernail was somehow over the Republican button is just unrealistic, my fingernail was not. The equipment is not working properly as far as I can tell."
Jefferson county clerk Carolyn Guidry says her office has checked the calibration of the machines and found no problems.

She says the electronic system is very sensitive.

Be vewy vewy quiet, I'm voting Democratic...

The Irony is Perhaps Lost

I really had no special desire to see this.

That is, until this (via Glennzilla):

In an Ironic Twist of Events, NBC and The CW Television Network Refuse to Air Ads for Documentary Focusing on Freedom of Speech...NBC responded to a clearance report submitted by the Weinstein Company’s media agency saying that the network “cannot accept these spots as they are disparaging to President Bush.”

The CW Television Network responded that it does “not have appropriate programming in which to schedule this spot.”

I'm not sure which angers me more, CW's lying (not being a demographer myself, I can only speculate that there would be substantial crossover in the audiences for say "Gilmore Girls" or "Veronica Mars" and the Dixie Chicks. But that's just me, who am I to tell the bastard child of the 5th and 6th broadcast networks (out of...six) that they have no clue?) or NBC's uncharacteristically bald-faced truth telling.

Glenn hits on a point I've made (see here) in the Net Neutrality debate:

Once corporate-owned networks start selecting which politically-tinged ads are "too controversial" and which ones are not, it is inevitable that messages which please the political leadership which regulates those corporations will be allowed, while messages that displease those political leaders will be rejected.

FWIW this will probably shake out in favor of the film, if this controversy gets any play at all. For example, I now think I'm going to go see it seven or eight times out of spite. And I hate the Dixie Chicks...

Another Slice of Pooh

My favorite libertarian recently posted an article on FoxNews (how do they still let him post there? He's clearly an apostate. But I digress...) about the sillyness, both substantive and political of the GOP's decision to ban online gambling (read: poker):

The people who are going to be affected by the ban are the millions of Americans who play online poker recreationally — and responsibly. But that $12 billion per year is going to simply dry up. Problem gamblers and minors will still be able to find places online to make wagers.

Any attempt to prohibit consensual activity is going to create black and gray markets. The legitimate, law-abiding gaming sites may now be out of reach for Americans, but that'll create a niche for truly unregulated sites. These sites will be far more prone to fraud, won't much care about the age of their customers, and customers who are defrauded will have no recourse.

There's also no telling who's behind them. But it's probably a safe bet (pardon the pun) to say that the people operating black market, blatantly illegal gambling sites will include a significant criminal element.

This being a topic on which I have some interest (former lives and all that...), I fired off an email, which he was good enough to publish:

Good article. I have two points to make in response - the first is that this is incredibly tin eared on the part of the GOP. My guess would be that poker professionals *should* be solidly in the GOP base - there is no more naked a form of capitalism then the ruthless meritocracy of poker. Yet, as you suggest, in a single move, the GOP has decided to jettison this group (a group with both visibility and money to spare to contribute to candidates who won't try and kill their livelihood.)

My second point relates to the notion that this is simply leaving tax revenues on the table. Yes, the operators of poker rooms won't pay taxes, but neither will the professional players. I subsidized grad school with online poker, and I always paid taxes on my winnings. Now? No way would I expose myself to criminal sanction by declaring "Other Gambling Winnings." And I don't think I'm the only one. Given the size of the market, that's significant tax revenue simply being left on the table so that state lotteries (or, as most poker players refer to them "taxes on stupid people")
and Indian casinos can maintaint their monopolies and we can "save the children."

Gregg Easterbrook: Making Sense (almost)

My favorite new show of the season is Friday Night Lights - (Heroes, Studio 60, Shark and The Nine all have their moments, but suffer from certain flaws. KF Monkey covered Heroes overly-portentious dialogue pretty well; Studio 60 is, surprisingly for Sorkin, unsubtle; Shark is an unabashedly terrible show made watchable by James Woods; I think I think The Nine will become less interesting the further in time the characters move away from the opening bank heist.) And I don't think I'm the only one.

Despite this critical acclaim, the show has struggled for ratings out of the block, so TMQ says "save FNL":

Here are the good aspects of "Friday Night Lights." First, brilliant cinematography. Many television shows claim to offer theatrical-quality film values; "Friday Night Lights" actually does. NBC has spent a ton of money on "Friday Night Lights," a reported $2.6 million per episode -- perhaps too much for the long-term survival of the series. In Hollywood, production money often disappears into Ferraris for the director and presidential suites for the cast; "Friday Night Lights" producers are getting their money's worth onto the screen. The episodes have many outdoor scenes, which are more expensive than studio-filmed scenes; lots of crowd scenes; lots of gritty depictions of school corridors, parking lots, restaurants, gas stations and other standbys of daily life. (The greater the number of scenes, the more expensive an hour of television is to produce; many contemporary TV dramas have too many scene shifts, but that's a separate issue.) Next, the acting is first rate. Third, the situations and characters presented are as close to real life as television can come. Yes, the cast is better looking than any representative sample of actual people, and 25-year-olds play 17-year-olds. But there's no over-glamorized action, no preposterous subplots. Surely "Friday Night Lights" would have stood a better ratings chance had the show been some "Gilmore Girls"-esque teen inanity [Pooh: Seriously Greg, Gilmore Girls is your best shot at 'teen inanity?' Afraid to take a shot at The OC because it's on Fox? Tsk tsk]. Instead "Friday Night Lights" challenges viewers with material that isn't flashy or pumped up.

Now to the not-so-good aspects. The pilot episode not only was a total downer -- it ended with the character you thought would be the series focus being paralyzed for life -- but gave viewers the impression the show held small-town life and prep football in disdain. The pilot was heavy on subliminals suggesting the producers thought the sort of people who play or care about high school football are rubes or have warped values. That view might be defensible as an artistic choice, but my informal survey of friends who love football culture and who watched the pilot was unanimous on this point: Everyone one of them said that if "Friday Night Lights" was going to be about bashing football, they weren't going to watch. It turns out the show does not think small-town America or people who care about high school sports are weird; subsequent episodes have been sympathetic to the characters and to the town depicted. But as the saying goes, you never get a second chance to make a first impression. Having the pilot be depressing, then end with a character paralyzed and everyone sobbing, was the sort of touch effete Manhattan critics love, but viewers don't -- who wants to watch more of that? The "Friday Night Lights" pilot was a disaster in terms of stating the show's case for its audience. This show would have been better served to start with the second episode, whose concluding image -- the coach and his petrified backup quarterback standing alone on the field of an empty stadium late at night with all the game lights on -- was haunting.

Okay, so Easterbrook can't help being a populist anti-snob, no shock there. I'm not an effete Manhattan critic, and I loved those aspects of the pilot, features not bugs as they say. However, I think he's quite probably right from a viewership standpoint - the reason that all sports movies are the same is that the 'scrappy underdog making good in the big game' thing resonates. Even if you know it's coming.

And FNL turns that paradigm on its head a little - there have been legit "chill scenes" in every episode thus far (the hail mary in the pilot, the one-on-one under the lights and "eyes wide open" scenes in episode two, and the conclusion to the 'standard training montage' in last week's episode). But the show never ends on these high points, as if to say, after the game ends their is still life to live. Last week's was a particular gutshot sort of moment - bringing in the hired gun QB right after the team building solidarity of the previous day's midnight practice. Perhaps appreciating these reversals do make me a Manhattan elite, but whatever.

In any event, watch the show, it's worth your while to get caught up.

Update: Easterbrook can't help himself from being a tool in some aspects - see Yglesias, who disses so I don't have to...