What He Said (Take X)

It sometimes frightens me how well Publius captures my unspoken thoughts on "big picture" issues. Today is a perfect case in point. In the context of the latest Plamegate info, he writes in part:

One of these common “roots” is the assumption that the executive branch gets to be the final arbiter of the limits of its own power. This single assumption ties together a number of the administration’s most troubling policies. For instance, according to the administration, it alone decides how detainees will be treated in wartime. It alone decides what constitutes torture. It alone decides who is deemed an “enemy combatant.” It alone decides who will be wiretapped. It alone decides whether it will follow the requirements of the Patriot Act. It alone decides whether America can legally go to war. It alone decides when documents are declassified. It alone decides when the Geneva Convention should be followed.

The tie that binds each and every one of these positions is that, in each one, the executive alone gets the final say on the scope of its power.

Although the “final arbiter” assumption explains a lot, it doesn’t explain everything. In fact, I think the “final arbiter” assumption is itself a symptom of an even more fundamental and flawed assumption held by the administration. And that assumption is the unyielding certitude of its own correctness and goodness. That arrogance, to me, is original sin of the administration – and the source of its most disturbing and often disastrous policies.

Think about it – most everything that you don’t like about the Bush administration can be traced back to their belief that they’re always right – and very right – about everything. Most obviously, the belief in their own goodness and correctness explains why they think they get to be the final arbiters of their own power.

(Emphasis mine)

It follows naturally. If you know, know that you are on the side of angels (or perhaps more accurately, that the angels are on your side) then these rules and laws are simply impediments to the cause of rightousness. Of course, you could be wrong.

One of the most dangerous failings one can have is hubris - forgetting for a moment that you don't know everything or could simply have miscalculated. This isn't exactly new, by the way. As Publius puts it:

Of course, history has shown all too clearly that executives are often wrong. In fact, when you really get down to it, the evolution of Western law has been an ongoing response to executive wrongness. The Magna Carta was about constraining the executive and subjecting its actions to the public will. The United States was created in part because of perceived abuses of the executive. Finally, even though our Constitution created a stronger executive (compared to the Articles), it still takes an obsessive number of steps to limit the power of the executive – even in wartime.

A conscious decision was made to limit the powers of the executive, so that we would not have to trust in the good will of an executive to respect individual freedoms. And if such freedoms need to be reordered in light of current concerns, we have processes in place to accomplish that reordering.

Alternatively, we can choose to live in a world where this astonishing piece of logical gymnastics is reconcilable with any reality in which we live:

The President believes the leaking of classified information is a very serious matter. And I think that's why it's important to draw a distinction here. Declassifying information and providing it to the public, when it is in the public interest, is one thing. But leaking classified information that could compromise our national security is something that is very serious. And there is a distinction.

Now, there are Democrats out there that fail to recognize that distinction, or refuse to recognize that distinction. They are simply engaging in crass politics. Let's make clear what the distinction is.

Coincidentally and conveniently, the public interest always seems to coincide with certain political interests and opposing political interests inherently compromise our national security (see above re: certitude). Or, shorter Scotty Mc-C: "I'm right and you are wrong. By definition."

If that's so, why bother?

Big MusicFriday: What Up, Dawg?

1. "Laugh to Keep From Cryin'" - R.L. Burnside. A more accoustic and less grimy sound than usual from the esteemed R.L. 8/10.

2. "Solvejg's Song" - Duke Ellington. From the "Three Suites" album where Duke takes on Peer Gynt, among others. Not my favorite piece, but it's fun to here 'classical' music played in that almost sloppy, 'jazzy' style. 5/10.

3. "On & On" - Erykah Badu. I think I've moved away from the period in my life when I really enjoyed hip hop soul. But a nice groove nonetheless. 5/10.

4. "Left Hand Suzuki Method" - Gorillaz. HUGE "Electric Mud" sample here that I never noticed before. Beyond that, who doesn't like giant cartoon apes? 7/10.

5. "There Was a Time (I Got to Move)" - James Brown. HEEEEEEEEY! James Brown would have delivered the best opening and closing arguments ever had he been a lawyer. "Jury, are you with me? HEH!" 8/10.

6. "What More Can I Say (Grey Version)" - Jay-Z Ft. DJ Danger Mouse. I'm on record as saying this album is about the best argument there is for an expanded definition of fair use in IP. 8/10.

7. "Patriot Game" - The Clancy Brothers and Tommy Makem. Irish Civil War anthem. Pretty sure this is the first band I ever saw in concer (for whatever reason, my parents were huge fans, and they came to the 'Burg about every 9 months or so.) 7/10.

8. "Getchoo" - Weezer. Never was big fan of "Pinkerton" but this is a quality track. 5/10.

9. "Fell in Love With a Girl" - White Stripes. I like the Joss Stone version better. But hey, it's the Stripes, so it can't be all bad, right? 5/10.

10. "Give it Up" - ZZ Top. Ok, ok, I give (it up), that's the end of this week's ten. (And the end of horrid puns for this post). 6/10.

6.4. Not the best, but not the worst from you, little White Hardrive that could.

Object Lessons

One of the best parts about my job is I get an inside look on how to do or, especially, not do in the course of lawyering. Within the past week, there were four incidents which were what KRS-One might describe as "Edutainment." (Names, conversations and anything else that follows have been altered or completely fabricated for the purposes of self-preservation)

Lesson # 1: Don't mix your metaphors, avoid Stengalese. Rising to beign his rebuttal argument an attorney friend of WAP^tm was heard to intone: "Your honor, opposing counsel is attempting to cut the cheese to finely." Perhaps an odd way of saying that the other side's position does not pass the sniff test. (Alternatively, they're full of shit.)

Lesson #2: Don't tell the judge what he can't do:

Judge: Motion denied

Lawyer: Judge, you can't do that.

Judge: I just did.

Lawyer: Respectfully, you don't have the authority

Judge: I have all the authority I need. See you for start of trial on Monday

Lawyer: Well, you can start the trial on Monday, but I won't be there.

Judge: (Looking up) Oh, You'll be there

Lesson #3: Relatedly, when you're winning, shut up. Immediately after the above:

Judge: Other lawyer guy, do you have anything to add at this time

OLG: No, sir. Your honor's understanding of the situation is perfect. Your wisdom is beyond reproach. Best. Judge. Ever.

Judge: Why yes, yes I am.

Lesson #4: The Chewbacca Defense is useful in front of a jury. In front of a judge who knows what you are doing, not so much.

(Scene: Discovery dispute where side A has allegedly not given documents to side B despite repeated promises that disclosure was forthcoming)

Harried Side B Lawyer: So you see your honor, despite these 17 promises, in writing, we still haven't received anything.

Judge: Thank you. Slimy Side A Guy, what do you have to say for yourself?

SSAG: I like peanut butter.

Judge: That's nice, what about the documents?

SSAG: If his hair is sloppy, he does not get a copy.

Judge: I'm sorry, you are basing your defense on opposing counsel's hygene?

SSAG: Look! A Jackalope!

Judge: Yes, they do bound through from time to ti...wait a minute, that's not an answer!

SSAG:

Judge: Baliff, take that *&^$ downstairs and book him for contempt

And, Scene.

An Obvious Point Worth Making

As a follow-up on Cynthia McKinney, a simple point is that her invoking the race angle is doubly damaging - first, it unnecesarily ups that ante in what is at heart a profoundly silly controversy (or perhaps was until /if she slugged a cop,) and second it obscures real controversies containing disturbing racial implications. To whit, the Duke Lacrosse story.

It's enormously unfair, but McKinney's almost offhand assertion of racism give cover to those who want to dismiss the more explosive aspects out of hand as more of the same. As an example of what I'm talking about see this takedown by Sadly, No! (I'm not going to link to the original article, because it is one of the uglier pieces to have seen the light of day. Be warned.)

Controversy!

Sawx Win! But, Ye Olde Towne Marketing Engine being what it is, we can't just win. Looking inside the boxscore we see:

Pitchers	IP	H	R	ER	BB	SO	HR	PC-ST	ERA
J Beckett (W, 1-0)	7.0	7	1	1	1	5	0	109-75	1.29
M Timlin	1.0	2	0	0	1	0	0	21-11	0.00
J Papelbon (S, 1)	1.0	0	0	0	0	2	0	11-8	0.00

Note that it was a 2-1 game...3 games into the season, and Foulke has already lost his closers job. To which I say "good". He had nothing, nothing on opening day after having less than that last year. He was huge in the World Series run, but it may have killed his arm.

It's always a tough spot in sports (or in any endeavor, really) to draw the line between where you give someone the 'respect' that their contributions have 'earned' and this continued indulgence becomes harmful to the whole enterprise. But having a closer who can't, you know, close is nowhere near that line. Especially when you have a hoss like this:

waiting in the wings.

And of course the Sawx being the Sawx, the speculation will run rampant as to how this will affect Foulke's confidence or the Bosmos team chemistry, or the player's faith in Francona (Watch this space [free reg req] for the inevitable Shaughnessy column on one or more of said topics.) That being said, the Sox cognescenti at SOSH unleased a collective combination of "duh" and "well done Tito" at the move.

Oh yeah, MFY's lose, A-Fraud K's with man on 2nd, 1 out in the 8th with the score tied at 4. The data points continue to mount...

Update 4/6/06: That didn't take long. I ask, CHB delivers.

AssHole of the Week: Cynthia McKinney and the Holy Gripe

"Help, help, I'm being repressed!"

- U.S. Representative from Georgia, 4th District Dennis The Peasant

Slinging the mud on Capitol Hill

In a rich crop this week, ranging from Delay's defenders to the Hammer Himself (big brass ones, you got there buddy.) to Icepick (almost there, buddy...)

But really, there could only be one winner. Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney, claiming to be a victim of...well something or other:

McKinney, a Democrat from suburban Atlanta, didn't stop at an officer's request last week, then turned around and hit him after he reached out and grabbed her, said Capitol Police Chief Terrance Gainer

Damn Capitol Hill police, always biting lawmakers in the hand.

So is she a victim? Uhm, Sadly, No! Congresswoman. It seems to me that requiring a Congressperson to be identifiable as, you know, a member of Congress before just walking into a secure building would be a Good Thing. It would hardly be a "secure environment" if someone could just say "Hey! It's me, let me in."

And, no, it's not racial. (At least, not until you took it there, Congresswoman. Rosa Parks, you are not.) It's possible that the guard may have recognized you had you been a white guy who's on TV all the time, but then you'd be a Senator, and you aren't there yet (or ever, likely). As they say, trust, but verify.

Gainer gets it about right, with either a great deal of restraint, or a talent for dry wit:

"Even the high and the haughty" should be able to stop and identify themselves as members of Congress if confronted at a security checkpoint, Gainer said. "The response is not to hit a police officer."

And aside from the sheer idiocy of slugging a cop for doing his job, as well as the unsympathetic nature of the "don't you know who I am?" defense, this is terrible, terrible politics. Instead of a Delay field-day, the cries of "Look! A Jackolope!" ring out from sea to shining sea. Just a reminder that the whole "the Dems will find a way to blow it. Again" meme has a solid factual basis. Which leads us to...

Update: Otto Man agrees.

Update #2: My further thoughts

Slappy in Two Games Or Less

I don't want to revisit the 2005 AL MVP travesty...but, in my most predictable post of all time...it's taken exactly two games to demonstrate my point.

Opening day, Yankees up 3-0 on Barry Zito, who has less on the day than Memphis did in the Elite 8 and, quoth Simmons:

7:45 -- Sheffield strikes out on a 3-2 pitch (bringing Zito's pitch count to an even 300). ... And if you don't think we're in "Cheap Grand Slam" territory for A-Rod right now, you obviously don't know the man very well. Is there any way I can wager on this?

7:49 -- Here's Kay: "Driven deep to left field, going back, Payton, looking up ... see ya! A grand slam for Alex Rodriguez, the 430th home run of his career! And the Yankees have a 7-0 lead!"

Would now be a bad time to mention that "See Yah" is one of the more loathsome catchphrases in sports? It does perfectly capture the smug sanctimony of the Yankee fan, though. Lest one of you soulless MFY-loving vampires show up here, allow me to proffer my YH-Garlic:

That might get old. But probably not.

Anyway, on to todays game, here's the box score from the top of the 9th:

New York - Top of 9th	Score
Huston Street pitching for Oakland	NYY	OAK
H Street relieved J Kennedy.	3	3
R Cano lined out to center.	3	3
J Damon doubled to deep right.	3	3
D Jeter grounded out to shortstop.	3	3
G Sheffield walked.	3	3
A Rodriguez grounded into fielder's choice to shortstop, G Sheffield out at second.	3	3
0 Runs, 1 Hits, 0 Errors

Quick recap - game in hand = grand slam. Game on the line = tame ground out. Not that it matters if your only interest is as a fantasy owner, or, apparently, a sportswriter.

I Occasionally Lack Wisdom

Not Smart, Pooh

PoohsDay Blues Hip-Hop: Straight Bangin'

Usually, (or, in recent weeks, unusually) this space is reserved for ruminations (and playlists, and poor puns) on the Blues artform. This week, we're going to, as the kids say, flip the script. Since WAP^tm is Straight Bangin today, we're going to put the 'pod on Hip Hop mini-spin and see what we get.

1. "Let Me Clear My Throat" - DJ Kool. With the Ed Lover Dance music. Who didn't love the Ed Lover Dance?

2. "I Wish" - Skee-Lo. One of the longtime ushers at T-Wolves games looks just like Skee-Lo. And then he throws out the little nerf ball and let's kids shoot at the adjustable hoop he's wearing on his back.

3. "White Lines" - Grandmaster Flash and the Furious Five. . . . Oh sorry, just bobbing my head to the bassline. Carry on.

4. "Soul Flower" - Phracyde ft. Brand New Heavies. James Brown meets hippie-hop. Got to have it (Soul Flower). When you want it...

5. "Uptown Anthem" - Naughty By Nature. What happened to these guys? They were hot as hell and then like Keyser Soze, they were gone.

6. "This Is Radio Clash" - The Clash. Not Hip Hop you say? Perhaps, but it could be and it's good enough for me.

7. "What's Up Doc?" Fu-Schnikens ft. Shaq. Often times known as the PoohSchnikens in these parts, don't know why. I'm not ashamed to admit that I sometimes feel the flow of Shaq Fu. As the man himself says he's Not Christian Laetnner/ Not Alonzo Mourning. Nor, thankfully, is he Ed Nelson.

8. "Who's The Mack?" - Ice Cube. Back when he gave an ish. Though the acting thing is working out quite well for him, who am I to hate?

9. "The Choice is Yours" - Black Sheep. Another wha happened? Group. Say it with me. Engine Engine Number 9/ On the New York Transit Line/ If my train falls off the track/ Pick It Up, Pick it Up, Pick it Up. Parents, this is the kind of music that starts your kids down the road to bling. You would never have sent me to summer camp had you known I'd be exposed thusly.

10. "Money Ain't A Thang" - Jay-Z and Jermaine Dupree. Last, but not least. Ferraris, Jaguars, etc.

Upon reconsideration, and looking at the balance of the list, I don't think I qualify as bangin' any longer. It's a sad, sad day when the IPod makes a fool of you.

My Shining Moment

Go Gators! Ok, now that that's out of the way, I need to take a shower.

Amazing how the first time someone plays halfway decent, UCLA folds like a laundry service. But I'm not gloating. Actually, yes, yes I will gloat. Basketball has been saved from purgatory for a year. Hurrah.

But I still feel dirty having cheered strenously for Florida. Billy Donovan didn't even look happy. It's almost like he was interviewing for an NBA job...Sacto Hello? (Because that worked out well when they tried it with Pitino, and Calipari and Montgomery, and Tarkanian [SWEET PEA!])

For me, the highlight of the night was this Packerism: "Jim, I guarantee we'll see both of these coaches in the Final Four again in our lifetime." I just found that statement amusing. That's all. No other implication there. Nope, none. We'll see you next year, you braying ass.

Overall, disappointing end to a tourney that featured a great first weekend (got started right away with that BC-Pacific game), up and down second weekend, and a crap Final Four.

Over

I'm here to tell you, the Poker Boom has officially jumped the shark. When an episode of Lost_boom is based on a game of NL Hold 'Em for Mango stakes, it's over. It appears I got out when the getting was good.

(BTW, Pooh's Theorem of Lost continues to hold: last two episodes, Sun & Jin; Locke. Booya.)

As for the Wing...NOOOOOOO. Josh and Donna campaign fling? Boo. Plus, Worst. Cliffhanger. Ever, considering that the actor himself is you know, dead.

And Another Thing

As if the college hoop skeptics needed more ammo. Two absolute turkeys of semifinals, (though, in his intro to the George Mason game, the collassal prick even managed to sound magnanimous in congratulating the Patriots (who simply couldn't make the shots that they had made all tourney, and had no answer for Corey Brewer. Not a lot of 6'8" guards in the CAA, I'd imagine.), combined with the transcendant Wade-LBJ duel, and the Associationists cried, in unison, AHA! Proof of the superiority of said pro game.

Myself, I take a slightly different tack. The fact is that the crazed intensity of the best two young slashers in the L going head to head, or the deleriousness of Staples as Kobe goes for 22 in the 3rd quarter is noteworthy because it is so rare. One of the things we forget watching tourney games is that they are neutral court games. Just for the heck of it, I rewatched the first Villanova-UConn game from this year on the DVR (definite "save until I delete status"), and I was struck by the rabid intensity of the crowd, and the game wasn't even played on campus. Aesthetically, 5,000 drunken college students tends to add to the experience.

Plus, as much lip service as NBA players give to "every game mattering" anyone who watches often knows that this is BS. Each team has at least 10 games a year that they basically phone in (and given the schedule, it's almost inevitable.) This dynamic is even more clear in person, where you can often tell in the first 6 minutes that one team (usually the visitor) is just not with it tonight, and extensive gar-bage time could ensue, as Marvelous Marv might say. Over the course of a 35 game college schedule, finding a reason why each game is 'special' is not as much of a stretch: there are rivalries, hated players, must-win-to-get-into-the-tourney situations, the big bullies going into a hostile gym (my favorite games), and so on.

Finally, the college game just sounds different. Even in tournament games there is a particular moment, when one team is on a run, perhaps has just hit a 3 to cut a lead to 2. As the other team brings the ball up the floor, the point guard comes to half court to meet him, gets down in his stance and starts clapping. There's a particular roar at that moment, that you almost never hear in the NBA.

I'm not going to claim that the college game is better, or more skilled, or any nonsense like that. I am still going to claim that from an excitement standpoint, I'd rather watch a regular season D-I game over most NBA games (Phoenix games largely excluded at this point. Boris Diaw is in my current 5.*) Now the playoffs (Playoffs!?!?!?), that's another story.


* Just to keep track, I think I'm going to have to keep a tally of my "five on the floor". Right now

PG - Jason Kidd. 12 wins and counting, carry on.
SG - Kobe (I still hate him, but that 3rd quarter was pretty sick.
SF - Boris Diaw
PF - KG. Please stay in the Mini-Apple.
C - Joakim Noah. Go Gators (blech).

Pooh's Hateration

I am angry. Filled with rage. Sputtering, even.

I feel that strongly about having to root for Florida in tonight's national championship game. I think Billy Donovan is a prick, a hucksterish Rick Pitino wannabe, and another one of those college coaches who are far better in the recruiting living room than on the sidelines (looking at you, Jim Calhoun. And you, Roy Williams. And you, John Calipari. And especially you, Bobby freaking Huggins) And I have to root for him.

Because I hate this UCLA team more. In another sporting context, their style would be derided as "overly negative", "scientific" or perhaps just "cynical". One-Nil to the ArsenalBruins and all that. Yes, yes, they've played great defense, well coached, blahbittyblah. Because of course Ben Howland has coached them to be the best FT defense team of all time. Anytime you can hold your opponent to 46% from the line you're doing something right. Right?

And by right, I mean 'being lucky that the 4 worst games played this tourney have been played by our opponents' and being on the receiving end of a World-Class choke job by the 'Stache & Co. So now we get Bill Walton walking into NBA arenas singing stupid fight songs, off-key, wearing Greatful Dead tie-dye yelling out "U-C-LLLLLLLA" (I actually like that cheer, in general) about this being "the greatest teaaaaamm of allll tiiiiiiiime. Throw it down Mbah a Moute, throw it down!" The bile rises inside of me.

Much of my distaste in unabashedly aesthetic. 50-45 games suck. Scoring 20 points in the second half and still winning sucks. Your offense being dribble for 33 seconds, throw up a 25-footer and either hope it goes in or that you get a put back because your big guys have been continuously donkey-punching their man the entire game (O and D, 40 minutes of 5-on-5 state of constant foul. It's fan-tastic.) sucks. NASCAR is more entertaing than a UCLA game. So is cricket.

And let's not talk about every Los Angelino you know puffing their chest out and already crowing about the 12th banner, as if, A) they were alive for the first 10, B) could pick George Zidek, J.R. Henderson or Cam Dollar out of a lineup, C) could have named more than 2 of UCLA's players OR their coach two weeks ago or D) weren't crowing about USC being the greatest e-vah 3 short months ago.

Basically, to paraphrase a friend from a decade ago, I know a little something about basketball, so I know you can't root for UCLA tonight. (Unless you picked them to go all the way, in which case you're not wrong, you're just an asshole.)

Go Gators. You have no idea how much that hurt me.

Angry Madness

Thanks to a commenter in a previous thread, we are directed to read the Billy Packer Retirement Fund proposal. Naturally, I say here-here. (Even moreso after listening to this interview from a few years back). I'm actually getting slightly gleeful in anticipation of the jackassery which he spouts during the George Mason game though my subtle fear is that the Pats get blown out and he starts spouting some nonsense about them not being able to handle the big-time athletes of Florida. After they have beaten teams containing what I estimate to be 13 future NBA players over the course of the tourney.

(In case you're wondering, Shannon Brown, Mo Ager, Paul Davis, Tyler Hansbrough, Reyshawn Terry, David Noel, Danny Green, Hilton Armstrong, Josh Boone, Rudy Gay, Marcus Williams (felonies included), Craig Austrie and Jeff Adrien, though I wouldn't be surprised if Anderson and Denham Brown got a look as well.)

It's too bad that there is no "radio Tivo" readily available, else I would watch on TV and listen to the radio broadcasts. (For whatever reason, the radio always seems about 1.5 seconds ahead of the TV here) Then I could get my fill of the wonderous Bill Raftery. Sadly, I'm stuck with Bloviating Billy and his little dog toto the King of Cliche.

As a final note, as I was dropping my dad off at his office after taking him out to lunch the other day, we ran into our former next door neighbor. The guy who had a hoop in his driveway where I learned to play. Anyway, we naturally got to talking about the final four, and we got him wound up and he started into an extended rant on what a prick Jim Calhoun is. So, Pops, its not completely your fault that I'm a massively opinionated Hater. Just mostly.

As for the games, I'm a little gunshy given the decimation of all of my picks this year. GMU shouldn't be able to hang with Florida, right? But, as the (semi) pros put it:

What’s WRONG with these people? Have they not seen George Mason play in this tournament? Have they forgotten? This is the best team we’ve seen over the last two weeks (followed closely by, well, Florida, actually). Let’s take this all the way.

The dream has to end some time, right? As to the other game, I just hope LSU whomps up on UCLA early so the Bruins have to forego there 2002 era Pittsburgh Panthers identity and get up and down the floor a bit. Plus, I've decided that I hate Jordan Farmar's hair. Look, either go 90210 with the sideburns or Seth Cohen with the hair. Both at once, not ok. Though the Evil Spock goatee is pretty tough.

A Closeted Conservative?

So, after all my huzzaing of RIA's Return (yes 'pick, both of them) (bastard) let's talk about me. One of the things I think is odd about about myself (hey, if I'm going to be narcicistic, I'm going whole hog) is the dichotomy between my 'personal life' and my 'politics'. In terms of what I do, I'm pretty 'conservative' (with the noted exception of religion). I'm not and have never been a club-kid, I dress 'traditionally' (if sloppily, at times), I tend to not like especially 'experimental' movies and music, etc. I'm for capitalism and football (though I like soccer also) and cheeseburgers and beer.

In comparison my politics are demonstrably leftish, though I'd prefer to describe myself as some combination of "Independant" and/or "Centrist", though certainly not "Moderate." (See here for definitional help) Though, my driving ideology is that while I have what I think are the answers for me who am I to tell you what you can do. Of course, I'll tell you what I think you should but that's A) just me being an ass; and B) an opinion, which you can take or leave. Once you start turning "opinions" into laws, backed by men with guns, I start to get the willies. (Across the range of social 'vices' I'm about as permissive as they come, though I participate in very few of them myself. Of course, I don't consider gambling a vice, but that's because I am/was good at it. But I digress.)

Anyway, all this rambling brings me to a study from neuropolitics.org (via the Battlepanda) I ran across a few weeks ago about the differences between liberals and conservatives. Understanding that "anectdote" is not the singular of "data", I thought I'd take a look at some of the findings and see how well I fit the stereotype.

• Liberals are more inclined to believe that the rich and powerful have a negative social value.

Nope. I would posit that a goodly percentage of 'rich people' got that way on some form of personal merit. Bill Gates earned every penny. As did Warren Buffet. Athletes are exceedingly good in a discipline that is well compensated because of popular interest. So, no, I don't think rich people are bad. I think they are self-interested, which is fine, but due to their wealth, they may have dispraportionate influence. Social justice, veil of ignorance, blah blah, you've heard it all before...

• Among men, conservatives are more active in high school sports.

Well I've coached both college and elementary school sports, so I think that's close enough.

• Extroverts have a better sense of smell than introverts.

I have no basis for comparison. Though I am quite good at smelling a rat. (Not literally of course)

• Extroverts tend to be more conservative and more religious.

I'm not sure where I fit in with the whole introverted-extroverted thing. But 'religious' is not me to be sure.

• Conservatives like the colors red and dark blue. Liberal men like dark green; liberal women like light blue.

I wear mostly, wait for it, dark blues, greys and occasionally red. Not so much with the green.

• Conservatives tend to be morning people.

Well, if anything marks me as Looney Left Liberal, this is it.

• Among women, conservatives are more likely to be sex-obsessed than liberals.

I'm clearly in the wrong party then. The 'Ladies Night' theory of political affiliation?

• Liberals curse more than conservatives.

Bullshit. I give you Dick Cheney, Karl Rove and Toni Scalia...

• Conservatives like beef more than liberals.

MMMMM. Steak. Tofu sucks. Lots.

• Liberals are more depressed than conservatives.

Correlation/Causation problem here, methinks.

Big Music Friday: The Return

In honor of RIA's Return (both of them. I'm leaving the duplicates up), several of the regular features of WAP^tm will also return. Go Blues! Go Asshole of the Week! (Keep 'homaging' in the comments, 'Pick, and you just might win!) And for now, Go IPod!

1. "609 Boogie" - John Lee Hooker. JLH vs. stride piano = awesome 9/10.

2. "House of the Rising Sun" - Doc Watson. Something is quite wrong and yet quite right about a country boy like Doc singing about a whorehouse in NOLA. 7/10.

3. "Poor Rambler" - Ralph Stanley. Fiddle me this, would I have ever started listening to bluegrass if not for the Coen brothers? 5/10.

4. "The Way U Make Me Feel" - Black Eyed Peas. Pre-Fergie, so it doesn't get the instant coolness edit. This album is not as good as I remember it from the first time I heard it. 4/10.

5. "Highway to Hell (Live)" - AC/DC. Brn-ner-ner, Brn-ner-ner-ner, Brn-ner-ner-ner, Ber-Ber-ner. BumpBumpBumpBumpBump... "I'mona HIGHWAY TO HELL." Sorry that got me going a little. 10/10.

6. "My Sharona" - The Knack. When this song came on, my neighbor at work got up and started dancing. Reality does indeed Bite at times. 7/10.

7. "Greystone Chapel" - Johnny Cash. Nothing like a good sing-a-long at a prison. Is it me or has Cash been devalued a bit by "Everywhere Man" being played every 30 minutes as part of those stupid commercials, much like Bob Seger and those Chevy Truck spots? 6/10.

8. "X" - Xzibit. Before Rides were Pimped and collars where popped, X was the latest in a long, long long line of nondescript one-hit hip-hop wonders. (Stand up, Skee-lo, Mystikal, Petey Pablo (RAISE UP), and so on) 5/10.

9. "Calm Like a Bomb (LIVE)" - Rage Against the Machine. Having this song over the closing credits of Matrix Reloaded probably went a ways towards insuring my inflated view of said film. Watchasaywhat? 9/10.

10. "Runaway" - Me First and the Gimme Gimmes. Yes, yes, this song has appeared here before, but MFGG always makes the mo' better 'mo better. 7/10.

Average= 6.9 dude. Well played, little white hard drive!

Return

RIA has returned, co-blogging at Done With Mirrors. Which gives me the excuse I need to visit DWM regularly, see here and especially here for other good reasons to head over.

Return

RIA has returned, co-blogging at Done With Mirrors. Which gives me the excuse I need to visit DWM regularly, see here and especially here for other good reasons to head over.

A Filmgoer's Manifesto

When we last saw the Monkey with the Kung Fu grip, he was smacking down some faux-pundit or other. Now, via Otto Man, the Monkey returns, with a plan to save the movie theatre industry:

Because I will tell you right now, right here, how to get people to go back to seeing movies in theaters. Without disruptive technology. Without theater upgrades. All for, oh, $4.65 an hour per screen.

I will now save your industry:

Hire. Fucking. USHERS.

The number one reason that every single person I know gives for not going to the movies anymore is the annoyance of dealing with people who just don't behave in the theater. Yes, yes, theater owners, your cell phone adds are cute. But how many of us have dealt with the idiots around us who dutifully turn off their cellphones, and then turn and chat -- not whisper, fucking coffee-klatch -- with the person beside them?

Indeed. Let me submit a list of removable offenses.

1. Cell phones - covered above. Though, maybe there needs to be a baliff. One of the common, amusing sights around the court house is walking by a jury room, and seeing 12 cellies (plus assorted 2-ways, PDA's and the occassional PSP) stacked in a neat row, guarded by a hawkeyed septugenarian.
2. Talking. There are certain movies when talking, within limits, is acceptable. Horror movies, for example. There is never a bad time for "don't open the door!" Horrible movies as well. If you find yourself in a screening of a George Lucas film post Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, heckling the screen is not only your right, it is your patriotic duty.
3. Snoring - (Sorry, Rob, if you're reading this) If you cannot stay awake through a movie, don't go see it in the theatre. And for god's sake, stop drooling on my shoulder.
4. Get A Room - you know who you are. I think Mr. Loaf had a better idea than the theatre. Relatedly:
5. Kiddies - don't bring your kids to movies they can't handle. And if they can't handle the film, you must leave, and never ever come back.

Additions? Suggestions? Volunteers? Viva la revolution!

Update: Honestly I had no idea that today was the 25th Anniversary of President Reagan being shot until I saw a story on it at the gym. I might have chosen a different picture from the google search for "viva la revolution" had I known.

A Pronouncement

According to Icepick, I am allowed to do this. So, I hereby declare the period from March 26, 2006 to March 26, 2007 the Year of Pooh.

Encouragement, insults, witticisms and random randomness welcome in the comments.

362 and Counting (Final B-Day Update) (We Hope)

To whomever,

How did you know?

On March 26 from 2pm (EST) till 3pm [Nena's 99 Red Balloons was] all that played on [VH1,] the American specialty music channel, over and over (and over) again.

The Nena marathon was for the final hour of the station’s “Pay to Play for Hurricane Katrina Relief” fundraiser. According to the Associated Press, “Viewers could request one video to be played on VH1 Classic for every $25 donation. For a $35 000 donation, they could select an hour’s worth of music from the 1960’s through the early 1990’s”.

One viewer apparently decided that the channel just couldn’t have enough of the 1984 protest song that so they requested to have it played continuously for an entire hour.

I have a fever, and the only cure is more red balloons. Sad to say I missed it though. Thanks for the effort.

(And thanks to Fletch for the catch)

Karnak (RIAA Edition)

Peer-to-peer CD swapping? That's a great idea!

The CD trading community still in private beta has much in common with DVD trading site Peerflix. On la la, you can trade any CD you have for any CD you want that’s available in members’ collections for only $1 plus postage. Like Peerflix, la la offers mailers to members to keep postage costs low and blows away half.com in making it easy to list and find CDs with an impressive search engine and catalog. I was able to enter the names of 80 of my CDs 10 minutes into trying the beta.

Who could possibly have a problem with this? Nobody sensible. Of course, that leaves the Auld Enemy

In any case, we’ve certainly heard about companies that facilitate trading music before getting into trouble. Is la la painting a target on its back for the RIAA? I’ll discuss the legal and industry implications of la la in next week’s column.

Cue RIAA: "All your discs are belong to us"

363 and Counting (B-Day Update)

In case you were dying to know what was the #1 song in America on this birthday o' mine (since I painstakingly researched the previous 28 years here), Billboard rides to the rescue...(drumroll)


Temperature by Sean Paul. I have to admit that Sean Paul is just the kind of crap I find diverting while driving, so good on him. The #1 status will probably soften the sting of being eliminated in the Sweet 16.

Responding to a Blawg Bleg

(Updated below, mea culpa)

My e-friend I.M. Kierkegaard has asked me (and others) to help publicise the upcoming Symposium on Judicial Selection and Independance, to be held in New York City on April 7:

On Friday April 7, 2006, there will be a SYMPOSIUM held at Fordham University School of Law in New York City on the subject of judicial selection and independence. The Symposium is free and open to the public.

The Symposium, titled "Rethinking Judicial Selection: A Critical Appraisal of Appointive Selection for State Court Judges," will focus on discussion of various models of appointive selection of state court judges.

To this legal mind, this sounds interesting. One of the biggest issues facing the legal system is the increasing degree to which the supposedly-impartial judiciary has been politicised, and anything that examines ways to remove that pressure is likely a Good Thing.

As RIA,briefly back from sabbatical, puts it:

Since I'm here anyway and thinking of judges, I must say that I'm beginning to wonder if our Supreme Court justices ought to stay strictly stateside, given the controversy over speeches delivered overseas by both Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Antonin Scalia. (By the way, I selected the link for Ginsburg because this one mentions not just the South Africa speech, but also remarks she made in Australia. This is also worth reading.)*

For me, it's not so much what they said outside of the country, but what they said. Scalia's latest diatribe, in particular, is disturbing. I know that my ideal of SCOTUS judges dispassionately making decisions without much regard for politics or policy implications is largely a myth, but it is still a laudable aim. The more pronouncements of this sort that we have, the more the "unelected super-legislature" meme rings true, which is to the detriment of all in the long run.

* Update: Bad Pooh. Hasty post makes waste, RIA's larger point got lost in my initial post:

Thus, while I'm being tongue-in-cheek about traveling overseas, I'm serious when I say that I think the Supremes are getting a bit sloppy about maintaining themselves outside and above the fray. What do you think?

(My Emphasis). That's what I meant to highlight originally.

(closed circuit to RIA: I'm an idiot, sorry for the mistake.)

A-Mo Emo

Funny, but Not Right. Five stages of 'Stache grief, in pictorial form...

Adam, we hardly knew ye

And this concludes this season's transmission of the 'Stache Broadcasting Network. See you on draft night?

Total (Blog)War

Ron notices that there must be something in the water right now. The spark appears to be the Domenech fiasco, but it's safe to say that there have been tensions simmering for a while.

Unfortunately, I managed to get myself caught up in the Hamsher vs. Cole undercard. Not my best moments (aside from snark, but I was always world class in that area, he says modestly.)
I won't comment further other than to say that Jane's retort is incredibly unfair and all too self-congratulatory - it's unfair because anyone who says this

Cole pissed me off because he's got nothing in the tank except a bunch of right-wing talking points -— that liberals hate America, hate the military -— and he doesn'’t care if he has to invent facts out of whole cloth to make them fit the contours of his inchoate rage.

just isn't paying attention, and I'm very disappointed and surprised in Glenn Greenwald* (though not either WRT Hamsher) for buying into that line. Here is John, last Thursday:

In the new Republican era, only fetuses , tax shelters, and ‘traditional’ marriage deserve protection. According to the actions of the current Republican party, the rest of us need to be wiretapped, monitored, have our homes inspected for whatever reason without warrants, and are incapable of making decisions on our own. My 20 year affair with the Republican party is coming to an end. I am not voting for any Republican in 2006 at any level, and I will be hard pressed to vote for this party in 2008- unless, of course, Cindy Sheehan is the Democratic candidate. These ‘conservatives’ need abut 10-15 years in the wilderness.

Hardly "right-wing talking points", aside from the Sheehan dig, which is something of a semi-serious running joke-not-really for Cole.

And secondly, It's self-congratulatory, because much like the Howell/Brady WaPo flap, the story becamunnecessarilycesarily personal invective rather than about the merits if the argument. When your first contribution is this

You better be able to back that up because I will be over here every f****** day until you do (and you canÂ’t, because I never wrote about white phosphorous weapons even once).

Do we understand each other?

it's hasurprisedsurpirsed if the response is more than slightly defensive. So, now that you've changed the discussion from "Is Howell a crappy ombudsman" or "Is Domenech a racist?" to "No, f*** YOU!" it's churlish to argue that someone is unable to engage you on the merits - you have gone a long way towards making them unwilling to do so.

To close, I think this comment probably got lost amongst the hubbub, and is worth bearing in mind for all involved:

Does anyone remember when you could say some[t]hing about someone, and if it was wrong, you were called “wrong” and not “a lying sack of shit?”

I think all parties are guilty as to the last point. Whether equally so is largely immaterial. "Let he who is without sin" and all that...And everyone grow up.

* Update: Glenn has clarified his position.

Allow me to just say here that my e-mail to Jane was not about John Cole specifically. I consider John to be one of the more level-headed and reasonable bloggers around. I thought he was unfair to Jane in his post, but not in a way that fundamentally impugns his character or anything - it was just a garden-variety unfairness of which we are all sometimes guilty.

My point to Jane was that her spat with John was worth talking about only in terms of the trend which it seemed to illustrate to me. A lot of the ranting about the crazed and irresponsible "Lefty bloggers" -- a theme that did appear in John's post, appended to Jane -- is often grounded in resentment at being held accountable. Tenacious pursuit of the truth of the type Jane displays (not just in her spat with John, but with Jim Brady and in so many other places) gets distorted by the target of the tenacity into some sort of crazed zeal, because that's probably what it feels like to the person who is targeted by it. It can be annoying to the person who is being held accountable, causing them to lash out. I thought John was guilty of that in his exchange with Jane, but more importantly, I think that's the source of a lot of the attacks on the "Left Blogosphere"generally.

Good enough, though I still think it's unfair to use John as the avatar for that particular failing.

Blue Moon

First time since 1980 that no #1 seeds have made the final for. Relatedly, first time I can ever remeber getting zero Final Four picks right. I don't think I've ever done that on a single bracket, yet this year, I think I'm o-fer every bracket I filled out. Though to be fair, UCLA is the only one I could have conceivably picked, pre-tourney. And I hate their team, so I would never...

Speaking of 1980, it was also the first time in about that long that I found myself consitently nodding in a approval to Billy Packer's analysis. Nova did a poor job utilizing their advantages. Allen Ray did seem a little overcome by the moment, repeatedly taking bad shots and fully earning his first half technical. But his best point of all was the Nova looked like it had just a little less bounce, possibly as a result of the grinding, punishing style of BC. It reminded me of a boxer who's been taking body shots for 8 rounds and all of a sudden has no legs for the end of the game.

Still, Randy Foye is good, and will be a quality NBA 3rd guard, and my appreciation for Kyle Lowery is immense. Joakim Noah is making himself some cash this tourney as well. Not Tyrus Thomas cash, but some serious jing.

And for the record, Kevin Drum's plagaristically named immodest proposal is intriguing.

But I have a suggestion for the gods of college basketball: reduce the number of timeouts allowed and don't allow timeouts at all during the final two minutes of the game. The 20 lumbering minutes that it takes to finish the last few minutes of most games is nothing short of excruciating, but in games where both teams have used up their timeouts the final minutes are some of the most exciting in sports.

So: no timeouts in the final two minutes. Let 'em run. Who's with me?

Maybe not no timeouts but certainly fewer and shorter. I also think they should go back to the rule where if a team calls a full timeout, that counts as the next "TV Timeout" so we don't get the situation where 3 whistles in 15 seconds of game action causes my head to explode from multiple tales of tails of some tasty shrimP.

Ding Dong, the Bitch is Dead.

The "Bitch" being Jim Calhoun

Me suck at coaching? That's unpossible!

So, I'll ask, how the hell was George Mason an 11 seed to begin with?

Also, Coach Calhoun, nobody could guard Rudy Gay, so why not, you know, try to get him the ball sometime in OT? Or you could have the game decided by Josh Boone shooting free throws...This game single handedly justified the entire tournament.

1 Year to Live?

Or is it one year until I live? 'They' say life begins at 30twenty-ten. 365 and counting.

As this puts me in a fairly reflective mood, let's cast back into the archives and discover the #1 songs in America on each of my birthdays (With apologies to Bill).

THE 2000s

2005 ... "Candy Shop" by 50 Cent featuring Olivia
2004 ... "Yeah!" by Usher featuring Ludacris & Lil Jon
2003 ... "In Da Club" by 50 Cent
2002 ... "Ain't It Funny" by Jennifer Lopez featuring Ja Rule
2001 ... "Angel" by Shaggy featuring Rayvon
2000 ... "Say My Name" by Destiny's Child

I'm forced to admit that "Yeah!" is one of my favorite crap songs of all time. "Say My Name" should have been on one of the American Pie soundtracks.

THE 1990s

1999 ... "Believe" by Cher
1998 ... "Gettin' Jiggy Wit It" by Will Smith
1997 ... "Can't Nobody Hold Me Down" by Puff Daddy featuring Ma$e
1996 ... "Because You Loved Me" by Celine Dion
1995 ... "Take a Bow" by Madonna
1994 ... "The Sign" by Ace of Base
1993 ... "Informer" by Snow
1992 ... "Save the Best for Last" by Vanessa Williams
1991 ... "Coming Out of the Dark" by Gloria Estefan
1990 ... "Black Velvet" by Alannah Myles

Wow. Just wow, some incredible crap there. Snow? Because when I think hard, I think Canadian, whiteboy-raggaman. Don't you?
But the 90's also brought us such genius lyricisms as

Got green never seen so you suck my jewels
Clutch my uz’, anything I touch I bruise
Puff make his own laws, ***** fuck your rules (that’s right)
Goodfellas, you know you can’t touch us dudes

Takethat takethat takethat...

THE 1980s

1989 ... "Eternal Flame" by The Bangles
1988 ... "Man in the Mirror" by Michael Jackson
1987 ... "Lean on Me" by Club Nouveau
1986 ... "Rock Me Amadeus" by Falco
1985 ... "One More Night" by Phil Collins
1984 ... "Footloose" by Kenny Loggins
1983 ... "Billie Jean" by Michael Jackson
1982 ... "I Love Rock 'n Roll" by Joan Jett & the Blackhearts
1981 ... "Rapture" by Blondie
1980 ... "Another Brick in the Wall" by Pink Floyd

So up til about 1988 I was kicking ass. "Eternal Flame" was a number 1? Well, I guess I can't say this country is going to hell in a handbasket, it's been there for years. And don't hate on Phil Collins.

THE 1970s

1979 ... "Tragedy" by The Bee Gees
1978 ... "Night Fever" by The Bee Gees

Ugh...But

1977 ... "Rich Girl" by Daryl Hall & John Oates

My heros.

Happy 29th, me...

Big Bey-be (and the Worst Game Ever)

2 down, 2 to go. Sorry to XWL, but UCLA is the worst team to make the Final Four since the famous "40 Minutes of 5-on-5 Fouling" Wisconsin team of 2000. (Great coaching that, it's hard to get guys to commit to be continuously fouling on offense but Dick Bennet managed, somehow, with that team.) I mean, you shoot 52%, you're going to win a lot of games. Oh, wait, that was UCLA's FT%. They went line by line, proving every accusation Yglesias levels against the college game in turn. (More on the MY, Zengerle NBA vs. March Madness 'debate' later this week.)

UCLA played about as bad a game in a pressure situation as I can remember. Fortunately, they're only #2 on the list as Memphis were the biggest bunch of sucks who ever sucked. Englebert HumberdinkJoey Dorsey was about 1-5 from 2 feet and in (gratuitous Izzard reference, sorry.) Rodney Carney cost himself several million dollars by torpedoing his draft status.

Someone who scooped up all the money Carney left on the NBA table (and perhaps more) was Tyrus Thomas. This kid was going to be walk-on. And now he's the most exciting player left in the tourney. Everyone knew he was an athlete, but when he started draining jumpers from the wing, I swear I heard cash-registers going off. This game also featured the most ludicrous 30 seconds of basketball ever recorded, naturally capped off by a tying 3. And the biggest play of the game was a 3 by Nate Newton Big Baby Davis. Best game of the weekend by a wide, wide margin.

And, to be clear for today, GO George Mason! Go Villanova!

And The Word For Today Is...

Awful. Used in a sentance it goes something like "the officiating in at least 3 of the 4 games in the NCAA tournament today was awful."

With the caveat that I saw about 7 seconds of the GMU-WSU game (go Pats!), the refereeing was sadly the dominant feature of todays Sweet 16 games. Which is a shame, because it obscured the greatness of Randy Foye and Rashad Anderson among others.

The mouth-watering BC-Nova matchup was sullied by plain inconsistency: touch fouls called one possession while a delivery of the People's Elbow went uncalled the next. Fittingly, the game ended on a call (thankfully correct), Nova scoring their winning basket by way of a clear goaltend (only the second clearest goaltend of the night. More on that later.) Though I do have to take issue with Al Skinner: you have three seconds and can run the baseline. Off of a timeout the best play you can come up with is for a running heave?

Meanwhile, the Florida-G'Town game largely turned on a maybe-a-foul-maybe-a-jumpball which was given continuation that '93 era MJ would have been embarassed to receive.

Finally, the Husky Bowl. If this year has been Coach K's best coaching performance, it has undoubedly been Jim Calhoun's worst. (The fact that they're still in the Elite 8 tells you what you need to know about their talent level.) I suppose you could theoretically do a worse job motivating your team, but the combination of quick substitutions after mistakes, no feel for rhythm, and a habit of public embarrassment must come close. I was thinking to myself "Self, I really hate Rudy Gay's attitude." And self answered "Dude, Calhoun's a dick, I wouldn't want to play for him either." I think myself is right.

And this game had not one, but two moments remiscent of that Kentucky-Umass game from a decade ago, when the game turned on a ludicrous technical fould being called on John Calipari. First there was the T on Calhoun for throwing the ball to the wrong ref. Oh please. Second, the touch 3rd foul on Roy followed by an instantaneous double-T on Roy and Gay. Come on guys, these are big boys. If you are going to let Roy get hammered every time he goes into the lane, how is a little staring worthy of a techinical.

But of course the capper was the non-goaltend call on Armstrong. It could have been more obvious, but only if Armstrong had done a chinup on the rim and headed the ball out of the cylinder.

So instead of focusing on Rashad "ONIONS" Anderson's heroics, I'm left with more bitterness. Least enjoyable Sweet 16 ever.

If It's Friday...

Then President Bush may have 'independantly construed' a law to not apply to him by way of signing statement. Parenthetically, I must have missed the "How a signing statement becomes a law" episode of school house rock. Or maybe I was just oscillating at too high a frequency due to the 4 bowls of Fruity Pebble to remember.

When President Bush signed the reauthorization of the USA Patriot Act this month, he included an addendum saying that he did not feel obliged to obey requirements that he inform Congress about how the FBI was using the act's expanded police powers.

The bill contained several oversight provisions intended to make sure the FBI did not abuse the special terrorism-related powers to search homes and secretly seize papers. The provisions require Justice Department officials to keep closer track of how often the FBI uses the new powers and in what type of situations. Under the law, the administration would have to provide the information to Congress by certain dates.

. . .

In the statement, Bush said that he did not consider himself bound to tell Congress how the Patriot Act powers were being used and that, despite the law's requirements, he could withhold the information if he decided that disclosure would ''impair foreign relations, national security, the deliberative process of the executive, or the performance of the executive's constitutional duties."

Bush wrote: ''The executive branch shall construe the provisions . . . that call for furnishing information to entities outside the executive branch . . . in a manner consistent with the president's constitutional authority to supervise the unitary executive branch and to withhold information . . . "

Sometimes you have to ask why we bother with that whole "legislative process" thing.

Anyway, back to your Duke pile-ons or your gawking at the train wreck that is the Ben Domenech Experience.

PerfectThe Opposite of...

Well, if you're going to go 0-4 on the teams you would like to see win, at least only 3 of the 4 games were crushing.

At least Bradley had the decency to get blown out. Duke played one of the worst games I can remember a Blue Devil squad playing, and still was rightthere.

Sweet comeback by WVU, and then a scrubby-scrub makes an off-balance, leg-splayed, eyes-closed 28 foot heave at the buzzer to beat them. [Edit - Ok, Paulino is a 42% 3pt. shooter. It was still a ludicrously bullshit shot.)

Gonzaga simply commits one of the epic chokes in modern sports histories. In fact the only good thing to come from today is that I can remind my readers that the Zags choke was at best #2 in the last 2 years.

Happy Place

I'm not even sure how to use my empircally demonstrated evil-hexing powers for tommorow. I want Washington and Georgetown to win, would prefer George Mason and mostly just want a good game between Nova and BC. So, naturally, Marcus Williams (Felony Included) will score 35, and run down press row slapping fives while snatching laptops. Georgetown will shoot 16 percent from the field. Wichita State will win in a game that looks like one of my old D-III Jv games, letting Packer crow about how bad mid-majors are, and BC-Nova will end up 37-33 in a game worse than the Wisconsin-Michigan State semifinal from a few years back.

I love the madness...

Suck (Bring it On)

I think that one looked well, like this.

But what does it say about you that your day was made by my team losing? Haters...

BTW, this looks prescient of me:

I can already see the game Duke loses, either in the Sweet 16 or the Elite 8. They're playing a team with two big guys who can score and an athletic backcourt. Sheldon Williams is in foul trouble. JJ Redick is getting face guarded by a 6'7 guy who can run and jump.

The final stat sheet will include Williams having 20 and 15 (plus 5 fouls) in 24 minutes

JJ will shoot 4-15, with 7 whiny faces made.

Paulus will pull a Wojo-double, 14 floor-slaps, 12 shots of hot-girlfriend in the stands and an astounding 24 group hugs at the FT line.

I'm a genius. Go Zags...

Hell is...

Trying to get anything accomplished at work right now, knowing that the Dukies are playing. Absolute worst part about living in Alaska is that the games start at 3:30 PM. I've been useless for at least the last hour, and now I have to dodge co-workers (and Fletcher) all desperately wanting to spoil it for me.

Also, the residence of whoever came up with this:

Just not right. Go Devils.

More Hate

Courtesy of Deadspin

And former Dukie Carlos Boozer is suing Prince.

Us against the world, right Coach K?

Asshole of the Week: Crisis Averted

Our short _WashingtonNationals nightmare is over. Alfonso Soriano will play left field. Well, he will appear in left field, as he will more than likely take a page from the Manny Ramirez school of outfieldry.

He looks terrified. And so would I, were I a Nats fan

The thing of it is, Soriano should have been thrilled to move away from second base. Baseball fans have long held the conventional wisdom that he's not a good second baseman, but until I looked into this story, I didn't realise that he's an historically bad second baseman. He has the 3rd lowest fielding percentage of the last half-century...over his 5-year career as an everyday 2b he has 105 errors. Next most? The not-well-regarded defensive stylings of Jeff Kent and Ray Durham with 59. Soriano has led MLB in errors at 2b each and every year he has played there. I'd go so far as to say that there is no athlete in recent memory in american sports who has been as singularly inept (with the possible exception of Greg Ostertag) over such a long period in recent memory.

So what was he thinking? Well, first all of the fantasy league owners who had him in keeper leagues. If fielding doesn't matter, he has god-like stats for a middle infielder not named Tejada. As an outfielder, he's a nice player, but not superstar level. Which brings us to the real reason: as a 2b he was something special. Now he's just another poor fielding corner outfielder who hits for power, doesn't get on base, and strikes out like Napoleon Dynamite at a biker bar.

First They Came for Tim McCarver...

A few months ago, I asked, and now, via deadspin, I have an answer: Yes, there is a place for those of us who hate all things Billy.

How could he not have seen an MVC game? And even more disturbing, how could he make the comment that he didn't need to see them to know about the strength of the conference relative to the other conferences.

. . .

So in retrospect, this tournament will be much more damning for Billy Packer than [Tournament Selection Comittee head] Craig Littlepage in my mind. What do you think?

Every tournament is more damning of Billy Packer. Feh.

Glennzilla

I'm surprised that no one has used this title before, but this goes on top of the ole book pile as soon as it comes out:

Cue the Mighty Wurlitzer in 5...4...3...2...and a-waaaay we go.

I don't think it's much of a secret that I've been dubious of whatever-we're-calling-the-warrantless-surveilance-program today from the start. And nothing that's happened since then has given me much comfort.

As to the legalities, the arguments presented by the administration are laughably implausible. One needs only to look at the response of say Fred Barnes on Bill Maher's show to the question "So these powers will be fine when Hillary is president?" (and I think I just threw up a little in my mouth writing that sentance) A smirk, a nervous laugh and and "of course" with that 'you know I'm just kidding right?' look on his face.

But beyond that, I still haven't heard a compelling, non-threatening, rationale for the question-beggingly named "Terrorist Surveilance Program". Or to be slightly more generous, the continuing secret existence of that program well after 9/11. No matter how many times the President argues otherwise, nobody (relevant) is saying that spying on terrorists is a bad thing. Many people have said that spying on non-terrorists is a bad thing - thus the need for oversight to balance the harms and benefits.*

If it's a good program in terms of acquiring useful information and protecting what privacy us average Americans have left, how tough a sell would it be to a GOP dominated Congress? And please, spare me the tripe about "now they know we're listening!" In the Darwininian world of high-level crimality and terror, the stupid ones get weeded out early.

Why do I feel like I've written this before?


*Update: Hilzoy puts it well, if snarkily (as if snark is frowned upon in WAP...):

Scenario 1: I own a grocery store. Agents of the government come in and take all the food off my shelves without paying for it. I protest; they say: it's for the troops in Iraq. I reply: but that doesn't mean you can just take the food without paying for it! I write to my representatives asking that they do something.

The RNC ad: "Now people like hilzoy want to censure the President for trying to make sure that our men and women in uniform have food on the table. She doesn't support our troops; she'd rather see them starve to death than give them a decent meal. It's a good thing people like her don't run the country."

Possible addition: the Democrats propose that we just buy food for the troops, as has always been done in the past. The RNC ad: "Now the Democrats want to spend more of your money on big government programs."

Weekend NCAA thoughts.

The good thing about being eliminated by midday on Friday is that I was able to unrepentantly root for what I'd like to see happen, rather than for 'my' picks. Thus, I was able to bask in the glory of about 8,000 fans in Dayton chanting "Make Roy Cry! Make Roy Cry!" O.K. maybe it was just me chanting while watching, (though I think Dubs was probably with me) but after a year hiatus, the Roy Williams Tearful Press Conference regains its post as my favorite sports moment of the year. Speaking indirectly of George Mason, I love the way this team plays. Pressure man-to-man defense. Controlled but aggressive offense, and despite not really being an uptempo team, they get down the floor in a hurry and force you to transition to defense quickly.

And while speaking of Tobacco Road, Duke played their best game in two months to handle GW. This was the first time maybe since the Texas game that they showed some of the traditional "Duke" defense - lots of ball pressure, overplaying passes, making the opposition catch the ball moving away from the basket. Josh McRoberts is very swiftly becoming my favorite Dukie since Trajan.

Connecticut remains unconvincing, to say the least. A pretty wretched Kentucky team hung with them all the way, and this is after getting a huge scare from a #16 seed on Friday.

I'm not sure how the Villanova-Arizona game ended up being decided by only 4 points, it had the feel of a comfortable Nova lead the entire time, though Marcus Williams (felony free version) showed a knack for making big shots. He might turn out to be a player. This game also featured Jim Nantz giving *^*&^& Packer about 13 chances to admit error in going after te selection committee like he did. And while Nantz admitted he was wrong, all Billy could talk about was how the Big 10's abysmal performance proved that the RPI is meaningless, and he was therefore incorrect-yet-accurate. Whatever, ass.

Since I'm eliminated in every pool, I can wholeheartedly root UW to take down UCONN. Go Brandon Roy! Go Lorenzo Romar! Though I will say that UW's PG play can be...shaky, and considering the way that felony-added Marcus Williams is playing for Connecticut, this could present a problem.

Ludicrous game winner for LSU vs. Texas A&M. With that shot, the last glimmer of hope for my chances went out the window. LSU-Duke is a potentially fun game. Big Baby vs. Landlord, etc.

I'm pessimistic about the Zags chances vs. UCLA, except that I'm not sure the Bruins have anyone who can guard Morrison: Afflalo and Bozeman are too small, and the bigs are probably not quick enough and too inexperienced. That said, Afflalo and Farmar have a huge advantage over the intramural-quality Raivio and Pierre-hyphenated French-Name.

Finally, I agree 100% this, I now hate Applebee's, I hate shrimp, I can even make a plausible case for hating sensations...but because it's stuck in my head

Just sit right back and grab some tails
The tails of some tasty shrimp
Sensations now at Applebee's
Are really worth the trip

Sauteed, crisp fried or fire grilled
Served on a handy skewer
So many shrimp you'll want to plan
A three hour touuuuur
A three hour touuuuur

So join us here this week my friends
It's time for eating good
Shrimp Sensations now at Applebees
In your neighborhood

I may even hate the upright bass, which is really too bad since it is the second coolest instrument ever (behind the digiridoo, of course.)

Are You About Anything?

That's my question to the Democrats allegedly representing me in Congress. Are you about anything more than staying in Washington and playing silly games because you get good baseball tickets and people are always throwing you fancy dinners? Agree or disagree with him, Feingold is taking a stand. A political stand, to be sure, but also one of principle indistinguishable from what he's been saying for 5 years. And with a massively unpopular President running an even more massively illegal black-op what do you do? You snipe anonymously from the sidelines.

I can almost understand Republicans like Hagel, Snowe and Specter acting like invertebrates. Sometimes you have to take one for the team. While I might quibble with this being that 'one' (actually, I think I'm a few steps beyond quibbling, but my forehead hurts so I can't be sure), there is at least a covinving tactical rationale for doing so.

What's the rationale for the Dems here? Aside from abject paralysis in the face of the mighty Bill Frist?

Personally, I don't give much of a crap about the electoral impact of supporting the censure for several reasons. First, it's March. Methinks there will be a few storylines between no and then. Second, if it's all about winnerism, then we are no better than they are, and deserve to govern less, because at least they have the balls to take a shot. As Northwestern State will tell you, crazy shots sometimes go in.

I'll accept as fact that these are politicians, so electoral impact is no lower than #1a on their priority list (some combination of money, power and sex being #1 in some cases.) But how can standing up and fighting, especially when you are right work worse than the tactic of 'hey you voted for these guys, look how bad they suck?' A 'tactic' which has gotten us (and by us, I mean the country)

into one (bungled) war, the rumblings of another in Iran, a disastrous disaster response, a drug package that is quite possibly worse than that for anyone without Pfizer stock options, and active disenfranchisement of minority voters in Texas and Georgia.

and that was only through January. And lost both elections as well, I might add. Not to mention that we are a few short months away from another round of 'family values' rhetoric to appeal to the lesser angels of the GOP base's nature.

Look, people want to mix it up here

Initially, 22% of Democrats had a favorable opinion of him while 16% had an unfavorable opinion. However, knowing he advocates censure, Feingold's numbers within his own party jumped to 52% favorable and 14% unfavorable.

So not only are they sticking fingers in the air to determine what to do, they can't even judge the direction of the wind properly. I am filled with confidence.

On second thought, what he said. As I descend into Angry Leftism, pushed not by the GoP, but by my own putative allies. Et tu, Kerry?

Suck (My Tourney Brackets Edition)

It seems to happen every year, but day 2, and I lose. Big. In every pool...(Not technically true. In the one I care most about, all I need is for North Carolina and Washington to net two more wins over the remaining 4 rounds than do Texas, Gonzaga, UW-Milwaukee and NW St. And I need who knows what else to happen...)

I thought I had dodged my "team that I overrate due to a strong conference tourney performance" bullet when BC managed to win...Not so much. Thanks, Jayhawks. Also, since Alaska is "Pac-10 country", I got to see zero minutes of Albany taking it to the UCONNvicts until the Huskies were up about 11. Probably good for me, because I might have tossed a nutty if I was forced to watch Marcus "Laptop Lightfingers" Williams win the game single (left) handedly. So, thanks CBS, wonderful job, per usual, getting us to the intereting games just in time for the commercials.

But, in a positve note, there is at least one ally in the fight against DDS (Duke Derrangement Syndrome):

After consulting with noted basketball scholars such as Bernard Lewis and Fouad Ajami, however, I can offer a fuller and better explanation of anti-Dukism. It isn't really about Duke at all. Instead, it is a dangerous intersection of three forces. First, anti-Dukism reflects the natural envy felt by the unsuccessful towards the successful. The rest of the basketball world needs to find some way to reconcile their own manifest backwardness and inferiority - particularly galling given that many of them have glorious pasts which make it hard to accept their current plight. Second, there are cynical and opportunistic leaders who deflect attention from their own failures by blaming Duke. Rather than address their own failings or reform their own programs, they direct the anger and rage of their fans and alumni towards a convenient stalking horse. And finally, there is a dangerous and unprincipled media environment, which sees nothing wrong with bashing Duke at every opportunity, making it socially acceptable and encouraging others to express such sentiments. This toxic brew - and certainly not anything intrinsic to Duke or its foreign policies - explains anti-Dukism. There is no reason for Duke to change, therefore; it should ignore the craven and cynical opportunists and their culture of hate, and do what it can to help them improve themselves rather than begin to doubt itself.

If aardvarks have tongues, his is firmly in cheek. If aardvarks have cheeks as well, I suppose. (via Drezner)

Suck (NCAA day 2 morning edition)

There is nothing worse then having to listen to the end of close of NCAA games by getting the play-by-play over the phone from someone watching at an airport. Not that the Northwester St.-Iowa game would have been fun to watch, or the fact that I'm dying that Arkansas is going to lose lost to Bucknell in a close one...Actually, yes, yes I am considering that Arkansas was my money-making pick in the pool I care about.

Also, here's what I have to say to all the Haters today...
You're team is next. If they make it that far.

Seriously, I can take some Duke related hatred, but from Kentucky or UNC fans? Puh-lease. I mean, I'm sorry that Laettner beat "The Unforgetables" (actually, no I'm not. A running, no look bank shot from straight on is not a deserving game winner), but the reason your team was scrappy and not talented that year was because your assistant coaches were mailing Fedex boxes of cash to recruits.

And having lived through the end of the Dean Smith Era, no Tar Heel blue wearer should ever, ever have the right to call out another team or its coach for being smug, superior, condescending or manipulative of refs. But hey, Roy Williams isn't any of those things...Can't wait for this years Good Cry.

That is all.

Straws

Blogger sucks. We all know this. However, it didn't get driven home to me until I was unable to edit or make new posts or accept comments during my biggest traffic day ever (thanks again, Paige). Oh well, at least I have an excuse for not having posted much recently.

Bleeding From My Eyeballs

4 Screens of the Madness will do that. I admit, I am weak and could not stick out the last round at the sports bar.

Some random thoughts -

• Florida is better than I thought. Tennesee is even worse. If Winthrop had made a shot, like, ever, they would have won by about 8.

• I did in fact put the Curse of Pooh^tm on BC. Fabulous game though. Was even better while eating strawberry waffles with toast, bacon and strawberries, with several cups of decent coffee followed by a Bloody Mary. At 10 AM on a work day. Alaska Standard time occassionally doesn't suck.

• I have a strong intuition as to the contents of the 'suspicious package' that delayed things in San Diego. CNN said it was a campus police dog that alerted. Somehow, that makes me think more along the lines of "dime bag" than "pipe bomb".

• I might indeed be lucky enough for Billy Packer to have to shut it. Way to show up and represent the BCS, Seton Hall.

• In case you missed it last night, the Knicks beat the Hawks in Double OT to win the NIT. And they said that Starbury and Larry Brown couldn't get along. I'm now officially surprised Isaiah didn't try to trade for Chris Webber at the deadline, just to see how toxic the atmosphere could become before FEMA became involved.

• Good gracious Gonzaga is a tough team to cheer for. They get absolutely nothing from anybody not named "Adam", manage to give up either layups or open treys on every big defensive possession, and commit ridiculous errors themselves (an over-and-back?) And then, to paraphrase Clef, ready or not, the 'Stache is taking over.
  

The Political Word for the Day...

Is Anosmic. Which means, if the Panda is to be believed, having an inability to smell blood in the water. Steve Benen's headline says all that needs to be said: For a crazy idea, it sure has a lot of support.

Thursday Afternoon Preview

7 PM

UNCW vs. GW: If you played college ultimate in the mid to late 90's you know you have to hate Wilmington. My rationality about this game is thus suspect. Go GW. GO Pops...

Iona vs. LSU: Supposedly, the smart Vegas money is on Iona for this game. Not sure if that means anything. Look for Tyrus Thomas to have at least 2 simply silly athletic plays.

Xavier vs. Gonzaga: The Official Deacon of The Church of the 'Stache has concerns...Gonzaga hasn;t played anyone in months and the games have still be close.

Air Force vs. Illinois: Largest margin of any first round game not involving a #1 seed.


9PM est games:

San Diego St. vs. Indiana: Mike Davis's last game. You heard it here first. And I'll be glad to hear the last of it as well.

Duke vs. Southern: If Southern fans think Avery Johnson is going to walk through that door...

'Cuse vs. Texas A&M: I feel very strongly that Syracuse will lose this game, badly.

Washington vs. Utah St.: Washington is my sleeper squad. That usually dooms a team to a first round loss.

Hookey (Thursday's NCAA Preview) - Morning games

Game time (HUH!) is her

Noon-30ish Eastern:

Pacific vs. Boston College: If you are Pacific and your best player is a Euro-big guy, you don't want to play an overly physical team. Oops. Of course, this might be the one where BC shoots 1-14 from 3, and one of my final 4 picks loses in the first round. (It's happened more than once...)

Wichita St. vs. Seton Hall: I'm embarassed to say I know nothing about either team. WSU is representing the supposedly disrespected Missouri Valley Conference, whereas Seton Hall is a mediocre Big East squad. Seton Halls wins and Billy Packer gloats about power conferences, because I'm not lucky enough for him to have to shut it.

Oklahoma vs. Wisconsin-Milwaukee: Haven't seen UWM much this year, but having seen Tennessee plenty, I wonder how much of their ridiculous hustle and intensity was Bruce Pearl and how much was the team. Oklahoma's Kevin Bookout is a strong candidate both for the all-Ugly squad, and to be billed as "Young Butterbean" in a schlock boxing movie.

3PM EST:

Marquette vs. Alabama: My favorite. Middle of the road teams from power conferences. Marquette isn't an awful team to watch, Novak is a great shooter and James is an exciting PG.

Tennessee vs. Winthrop: Tennessee overrated as a 2-seed. That being said, I don't even know what state Winthrop hails from.

Florida vs. South Alabama: A potential upset here. Yes, Florida is athletic, but as always they are a poor man's Connecticut - talented, undisciplined underachievers with a whiff of poor coaching thrown in. The only thing I know about SoBama is that the last time they were in the tourney, Bill Mussleman was the coach and their small forward had the greatest mullet in tourney history.

Nevada vs. Montana: Somebody look it up, is this the first "All-Mountain Time" matchup ever? Seperated at birth, Montana coach Larry Krystkowiak and Nevada Matt Bullard-in-training Nick Fazekas.

Orphan (5 PM) game: UCLA vs. Belmont. Perfect beer food coma game.

Yup

Via.

Maybe John Kerry should fly to Switzerland and introduce articles of impeachment by phone.

Good Times

This post was accepted for the 5th Carnival of Bad History. Thanks, Ahistoricality.