Monday, December 8, 2008
Sunday, November 16, 2008
Giants update
The loss in Cleveland in October was a good loss for the Giants--on the road, against a non-conference opponent, where nothing worked. The offense and defensive lines had been dominant up to that game, and both were terrible in Cleveland.
Since then, the line play as been very good, especially on the offensive side. Today they made the Ravens defensive line look like the Seattle Seahawks or San Francisco 49ers. That is, sad. Another 200+ yard night for the "Earth, Wind, and Fire" running back trio.
To complete the full list of elements, let's call the defense "Water" because no offense catches fire against them. The line is sack-happy and run-stopping, and the secondary is making interceptions. The linebacker corps is the weakest part of the defense, but no one has seriously burned them.
Yes, Eli Manning is not sparkling. Another sub-200 yard performance and a dumb interception. However, when your offense runs for over 200 yards per game, you're not asking your quarterback to light it up. He is managing the game well, using the hard count expertly. At one point, he drew the Ravens off-sides on two consecutive plays, turning a 3rd and 7 into a first down. I would like to see him run for a first down every once in a while to keep the opposing LBs guessing, but I'm not complaining.
The team is now 9-1. With Dallas beating Washington tonight, the Giants need, at most, three more wins to go to the playoffs. People are talking about how tough the Giants schedule is for the rest of the season. Absent major injuries (knock on wood), I see the Giants going 14-2. They may lose either to Dallas or Washington on the road, but not to both.
The worst part of the Sunday football that I saw today was a complete abuse of the replay system in Pittsburgh. On the last play of the game, San Diego tried lateraling to keep the play alive. Palumalu broke up the play and went into the end zone for an apparent touchdown as time expired. Yay! Game over! Time for the 60 Minutes interview with Obama. But no, the officials actually needed to review the play to determine whether the first lateral was actually a forward lateral, which, if called, would have ended the play and negated the touchdown. So the officials keep the players on the sidelines to review the play. After a few minutes of confusion on the field, the officials determined that it was a forward lateral and therefore no touchdown.
The game was over. The players were pissed off. Tomlinson looked like he could have ripped off someone's head. Just let them walk off the field.
Since then, the line play as been very good, especially on the offensive side. Today they made the Ravens defensive line look like the Seattle Seahawks or San Francisco 49ers. That is, sad. Another 200+ yard night for the "Earth, Wind, and Fire" running back trio.
To complete the full list of elements, let's call the defense "Water" because no offense catches fire against them. The line is sack-happy and run-stopping, and the secondary is making interceptions. The linebacker corps is the weakest part of the defense, but no one has seriously burned them.
Yes, Eli Manning is not sparkling. Another sub-200 yard performance and a dumb interception. However, when your offense runs for over 200 yards per game, you're not asking your quarterback to light it up. He is managing the game well, using the hard count expertly. At one point, he drew the Ravens off-sides on two consecutive plays, turning a 3rd and 7 into a first down. I would like to see him run for a first down every once in a while to keep the opposing LBs guessing, but I'm not complaining.
The team is now 9-1. With Dallas beating Washington tonight, the Giants need, at most, three more wins to go to the playoffs. People are talking about how tough the Giants schedule is for the rest of the season. Absent major injuries (knock on wood), I see the Giants going 14-2. They may lose either to Dallas or Washington on the road, but not to both.
The worst part of the Sunday football that I saw today was a complete abuse of the replay system in Pittsburgh. On the last play of the game, San Diego tried lateraling to keep the play alive. Palumalu broke up the play and went into the end zone for an apparent touchdown as time expired. Yay! Game over! Time for the 60 Minutes interview with Obama. But no, the officials actually needed to review the play to determine whether the first lateral was actually a forward lateral, which, if called, would have ended the play and negated the touchdown. So the officials keep the players on the sidelines to review the play. After a few minutes of confusion on the field, the officials determined that it was a forward lateral and therefore no touchdown.
The game was over. The players were pissed off. Tomlinson looked like he could have ripped off someone's head. Just let them walk off the field.
Friday, November 14, 2008
Three transition thoughts
1. Hillary as Secretary of State. It should happen. It's Hillary's segue to the White House. She'll take Biden's place as the VP candidate in 2012 and then run in 2016. Duh!
2. Auto bailout. No. Bankruptcy could result in terminated pension and health insurance benefits, which is why the unions are pressing for a cash bailout. I'm no economist, but instead of a bailout, the Federal government should insure a greater part of all pension plans that go bust via the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation and use terminated health plans as a clarion call for national universe health insurance. This gives no preference to any particular industry, ends this vicious cycle of bailouts, and fulfills Obama's promises.
3. Pardon Watch. Waiting for the Bush's self-pardon on Jan. 20th.
2. Auto bailout. No. Bankruptcy could result in terminated pension and health insurance benefits, which is why the unions are pressing for a cash bailout. I'm no economist, but instead of a bailout, the Federal government should insure a greater part of all pension plans that go bust via the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation and use terminated health plans as a clarion call for national universe health insurance. This gives no preference to any particular industry, ends this vicious cycle of bailouts, and fulfills Obama's promises.
3. Pardon Watch. Waiting for the Bush's self-pardon on Jan. 20th.
Thursday, November 6, 2008
Predictions so close!
Rounding to the nearest whole number, I nailed the popular vote percentages. I was off by no more than 3 electoral votes. I thought Ron Paul would get a few extra percentage points in Montana and deliver the state to Obama. Nebraska may give one electoral vote to Obama, so I may be just two off. I did think that Missouri, not Indiana, would go to Obama, but each has 11 electoral votes, so it didn't affect my EV prediction. I would also like to add that I pretty much nailed the 2006 election under my nom de plume Auguste Blanqui.
1. Barack the Community Organizer won this election. A Democratic nominee doesn't win North Carolina, Indiana, and Virginia without a strong grassroots organization. Sarah Palin mocked Obama's experience as a community organizer, but that experience got him to the White House and sent Palin back to whatever hole she came from.
2. McCain was not doomed to fail just because he was a Republican and the economic crisis. According to the national exit polls, when asked whether McCain would continue Bush's policies, 48% of voters said yes and 48% said no. That's not a bad number for a Republican nominee. McCain lost voters in September when his response to the economic crisis was so erratic, confused, etc. I still say he would have been a real maverick and maybe won the election if he blasted the final bailout bill as a gift to special interests. "Barack's bailout," proof he's a tax-and-spend liberal suckered by the special interests--now that could have been a powerful message.
3. There was not a "John McCain of 2000" and a "John McCain of 2008." They are the same person, one without any principles, only ambition. He all but admitted that in his own book! How can you be in the Senate for over 25 years and not have a domestic policy?
4. I have a poodle for the Obama girls. Take my dog, please!
5. Joe the Plumber was the best poster boy for Republican workin' class support since Dicky Flat.
I am hopeful that some things will get done. Bill Clinton didn't get a lot done because he was too sensitive to criticism from within his cabinet, Congress, and the press. He also didn't lay the groundwork for Congressional support for his more visionary proposals. He thought he could dictate to the Democratic Congress. Obama is more strategic in his actions and doesn't seem to be as sensitive as Bill Clinton. I think he'll be a much better party and national leader.
This nonsense that we are a "center-right" nation is just, well, nonsense. We are a mish-mash of a lots of people with lots of different perspectives. Each few years, some of us vote, most of our votes are counted, and one candidate wins. To the extent that you can come up with an average representing the collective will of the people of the United States, it looks pretty left of center right now.
Obama won a mandate (whatever the heck that means). He earned some political capital in this election, and if he doesn't spend it now, the political bank is going to go bust and Obama will find that his account isn't FDIC-insured. Obama and Congressional Democrats will be better off fulfilling campaign promises than "moderating" their agenda.
1. Barack the Community Organizer won this election. A Democratic nominee doesn't win North Carolina, Indiana, and Virginia without a strong grassroots organization. Sarah Palin mocked Obama's experience as a community organizer, but that experience got him to the White House and sent Palin back to whatever hole she came from.
2. McCain was not doomed to fail just because he was a Republican and the economic crisis. According to the national exit polls, when asked whether McCain would continue Bush's policies, 48% of voters said yes and 48% said no. That's not a bad number for a Republican nominee. McCain lost voters in September when his response to the economic crisis was so erratic, confused, etc. I still say he would have been a real maverick and maybe won the election if he blasted the final bailout bill as a gift to special interests. "Barack's bailout," proof he's a tax-and-spend liberal suckered by the special interests--now that could have been a powerful message.
3. There was not a "John McCain of 2000" and a "John McCain of 2008." They are the same person, one without any principles, only ambition. He all but admitted that in his own book! How can you be in the Senate for over 25 years and not have a domestic policy?
4. I have a poodle for the Obama girls. Take my dog, please!
5. Joe the Plumber was the best poster boy for Republican workin' class support since Dicky Flat.
I am hopeful that some things will get done. Bill Clinton didn't get a lot done because he was too sensitive to criticism from within his cabinet, Congress, and the press. He also didn't lay the groundwork for Congressional support for his more visionary proposals. He thought he could dictate to the Democratic Congress. Obama is more strategic in his actions and doesn't seem to be as sensitive as Bill Clinton. I think he'll be a much better party and national leader.
This nonsense that we are a "center-right" nation is just, well, nonsense. We are a mish-mash of a lots of people with lots of different perspectives. Each few years, some of us vote, most of our votes are counted, and one candidate wins. To the extent that you can come up with an average representing the collective will of the people of the United States, it looks pretty left of center right now.
Obama won a mandate (whatever the heck that means). He earned some political capital in this election, and if he doesn't spend it now, the political bank is going to go bust and Obama will find that his account isn't FDIC-insured. Obama and Congressional Democrats will be better off fulfilling campaign promises than "moderating" their agenda.
Monday, November 3, 2008
Predictions
Obama, 53%, 367 electoral votes.
McCain, 46%, 171 EVs.
I anticipate voting lines in important areas to resemble South Africa, 1994. And not just full of black people. I mean just long.
I am also expecting the Obama GOTV effort to swing some toss up states (FL, NC, MO, MT) and keep small leads in other battleground states (OH and PA). I see IN as just too red. I don't want to be greedy.
The state polls are close, but McCain practically has to win them all. Anyhow, that's my fear. Good luck everyone! To you in Virginia, a little rain never hurt anyone.
McCain, 46%, 171 EVs.
I anticipate voting lines in important areas to resemble South Africa, 1994. And not just full of black people. I mean just long.
I am also expecting the Obama GOTV effort to swing some toss up states (FL, NC, MO, MT) and keep small leads in other battleground states (OH and PA). I see IN as just too red. I don't want to be greedy.
The state polls are close, but McCain practically has to win them all. Anyhow, that's my fear. Good luck everyone! To you in Virginia, a little rain never hurt anyone.
Sunday, November 2, 2008
Weather.com's very 2004 weather outlook
Weather.com's "battleground forecast" has a lot of good news for turnout. But it's limited to Ohio, Florida, Missouri, and Pennsylvania. Don't they obsessively read Pollster.com and fivethirtyeight? Don't they know that Colorado and Virginia are new battlegrounds on the list? Republican bias? Sheer idiocy?
Anyhow, the forecast for Tuesday in Weather.com's battleground states looks sunny and warm, but Virginia does not look good. Warm, but kind of rainy. The map isn't clear about Northern Virginia, so I tried to find the DC forecast in Weather.com's "Election Countdown State by State Outlook" link.
For whatever reason, there's no page for the District of Columbia. Thanks, Weather.com. Given your inability to know what the battleground states are in this election, you probably don't even know that DC has electoral vote.s Anyhow, the outlook for DC on Tuesday on the real Weather.com shows warm weather with a probability for showers.
This is not good. You better show up at the polls! I'm talking to you, Virginia and Colorado! You had several weeks to get your ass to the polls so I don't want to hear a bunch of whining about a little moisture.
Anyhow, the forecast for Tuesday in Weather.com's battleground states looks sunny and warm, but Virginia does not look good. Warm, but kind of rainy. The map isn't clear about Northern Virginia, so I tried to find the DC forecast in Weather.com's "Election Countdown State by State Outlook" link.
For whatever reason, there's no page for the District of Columbia. Thanks, Weather.com. Given your inability to know what the battleground states are in this election, you probably don't even know that DC has electoral vote.s Anyhow, the outlook for DC on Tuesday on the real Weather.com shows warm weather with a probability for showers.
This is not good. You better show up at the polls! I'm talking to you, Virginia and Colorado! You had several weeks to get your ass to the polls so I don't want to hear a bunch of whining about a little moisture.
Thursday, October 30, 2008
If McCain & Palin win...
I will quit!
http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/mccain/1251437,palin-missouri-103008.article
Palin said "Country First" is more than McCain's campaign slogan. "That's going to be printed on every page in the employee handbook" if he's elected, she said.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/mccain/1251437,palin-missouri-103008.article
Israel
I'm so sick of hearing about Israel in this campaign. The devotion to Israel by the Jesus-worshipping folk is driving me crazy! Israel should not be a top issue in this campaign. Are we electing the President of the United States or of the State of Israel? I feel like a bad Jew.
Let's get something perfectly clear: You can criticize Israel and not be an Anti-Semite. Even Israelis criticize Israel!
Let's get something perfectly clear: You can criticize Israel and not be an Anti-Semite. Even Israelis criticize Israel!
Friday, October 24, 2008
Slicing the pie
I've been obsessed with the McCain's campaign to slice-and-dice the American people into good groups characterized as "pro-American" and bad groups characterized as "anti-American." "Real Virginia," "pro-American parts of the country," etc. Meanwhile Obama has a unifying vision, which generally does better in Presidential elections.
The slice-and-dice view of the country has been out there for a long time. It's sometimes called the "paranoid style" of American politics. This view see conspiracies everywhere. It has often been directed to Jews, but now it's characterized by Islamophobia. Are Muslims the new Jews?
George W. Bush's November 6, 2001 address to a joint session of Congress rekindled this spirit and set the Republican Party on a self-destructive path when disagreement over Iraq or other issues is tantamount to treason. Actually, not tantamount to treason, but actual treason. In Bush's 2001 speech, he declared: "Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. (Applause.)"
At the time, I assumed that he meant that other countries had to decide whether they were with us or against us. The Republican Party and the right wing applied it to the United States as well. To them, Americans, too, are either for or against "us."
Now the Democrats look like they're on the verge of controlling Congress and the White House. The hysteria we see is the wingnut freak out that a black socialist terrorist Muslim liberal elitist, all of which are disqualifications for being one of "us," may actually become President. According to the logic of the "with us or against us" crowd, the President will be against us.
What the hell do these folks do if Obama wins?
The slice-and-dice view of the country has been out there for a long time. It's sometimes called the "paranoid style" of American politics. This view see conspiracies everywhere. It has often been directed to Jews, but now it's characterized by Islamophobia. Are Muslims the new Jews?
George W. Bush's November 6, 2001 address to a joint session of Congress rekindled this spirit and set the Republican Party on a self-destructive path when disagreement over Iraq or other issues is tantamount to treason. Actually, not tantamount to treason, but actual treason. In Bush's 2001 speech, he declared: "Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. (Applause.)"
At the time, I assumed that he meant that other countries had to decide whether they were with us or against us. The Republican Party and the right wing applied it to the United States as well. To them, Americans, too, are either for or against "us."
Now the Democrats look like they're on the verge of controlling Congress and the White House. The hysteria we see is the wingnut freak out that a black socialist terrorist Muslim liberal elitist, all of which are disqualifications for being one of "us," may actually become President. According to the logic of the "with us or against us" crowd, the President will be against us.
What the hell do these folks do if Obama wins?
Huh?
I'm confused by Sarah Palin's pledge to fully fund educational programs for "special needs" children. How exactly do you spend an additional $15 billion during a "spending freeze."
I do like the right-wing's use of terms associated with "political correctness," aka "PC," which was the end of civilization just 15 years ago. Anyone taking bets on her use of the term "differently abled" by the end of the campaign?
I do like the right-wing's use of terms associated with "political correctness," aka "PC," which was the end of civilization just 15 years ago. Anyone taking bets on her use of the term "differently abled" by the end of the campaign?
Sunday, October 12, 2008
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
Debate thoughts before going to bed
1. McCain tried to capture his magic of 2000. Didn't happen. His jokes were received with crickets.
2. At all campaign stops near nuclear power plans, and maybe at every campaign stop, Obama and Biden should bring up this quote from McCain: "Nuclear power. Senator Obama says that it has to be safe or disposable or something like that." Ummm, yeah.
McCain doesn't just want to de-regulate the nuclear energy industry, he wants nuclear plants to be unsafe? It's unclear whether Obama didn't catch it or didn't want to raise it during the debate and give McCain an opportunity to clarify his remarks. According to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, there are 9 in Pennsylvania, 5 in Florida, 5 in North Carolina, 4 plants in Virginia, 3 in Michigan, 3 in Wisconsin, and 2 in Ohio.
3. "Bomb bomb bomb bomb Iran!" McCain walked into that one. Obama used it at the first debate, so I don't know what McCain thought he was doing focusing on judgment. McCain's response: weak references to his military experience, "I was joking with an old veteran friend who joked with me about Iran." Really, here's the joke. Doesn't sound like a casual conversation with an old veteran friend:
4. I also don't understand questioning Obama's Pakistan position. I think it's pretty clear that we will kill terrorists, let alone bin Laden wherever they are, period. By uttering the words "We will kill bin Laden" helps Obama. Do even Republicans understand McCain's position?
5. Speaking of Pakistan, I have noticed that Obama pronounces Pakistan, Iraq, and Iran correctly. "Nuclear," too. And yet he's winning? (Update: tip jar!)
6. McCain's closing remarks weren't explicit, but he was making an appeal based on his experience as a POW. According to CNN's "Uncommitted Ohio Voters," there was no reaction. Either they didn't understand that he was referring to his POW years or they just didn't care.
2. At all campaign stops near nuclear power plans, and maybe at every campaign stop, Obama and Biden should bring up this quote from McCain: "Nuclear power. Senator Obama says that it has to be safe or disposable or something like that." Ummm, yeah.
McCain doesn't just want to de-regulate the nuclear energy industry, he wants nuclear plants to be unsafe? It's unclear whether Obama didn't catch it or didn't want to raise it during the debate and give McCain an opportunity to clarify his remarks. According to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, there are 9 in Pennsylvania, 5 in Florida, 5 in North Carolina, 4 plants in Virginia, 3 in Michigan, 3 in Wisconsin, and 2 in Ohio.
3. "Bomb bomb bomb bomb Iran!" McCain walked into that one. Obama used it at the first debate, so I don't know what McCain thought he was doing focusing on judgment. McCain's response: weak references to his military experience, "I was joking with an old veteran friend who joked with me about Iran." Really, here's the joke. Doesn't sound like a casual conversation with an old veteran friend:
4. I also don't understand questioning Obama's Pakistan position. I think it's pretty clear that we will kill terrorists, let alone bin Laden wherever they are, period. By uttering the words "We will kill bin Laden" helps Obama. Do even Republicans understand McCain's position?
5. Speaking of Pakistan, I have noticed that Obama pronounces Pakistan, Iraq, and Iran correctly. "Nuclear," too. And yet he's winning? (Update: tip jar!)
6. McCain's closing remarks weren't explicit, but he was making an appeal based on his experience as a POW. According to CNN's "Uncommitted Ohio Voters," there was no reaction. Either they didn't understand that he was referring to his POW years or they just didn't care.
I am an East Coast Liberal Elitist, and I vote!
Why I am an East Coast Liberal Elitist
I'm no hockey parent. I play tennis.
I don't live in the heartland or on the frontier. I live in Washington, DC. The horror!
I like beer, but I'm no Joe Six-Pack. In my hometown, I once got laughed at by other customers at a liquor store because of the beer I bought because it wasn't American.
I have 100% Kona coffee flown in from Hawaii every other month. I am a member of a community supported agriculture group. I buy wine from a local vineyard.
I don't drive an SUV. I don't even own a car right now. I'm not complaining about gas prices. I often commute by bicycle.
I graduated from an expensive New England liberal arts college.
I got a passport before the age of 40.
My daughter, when she's born, will not be named Bristol or Piper.
My dog, a poodle. He summers on Martha's Vineyard.
I am not so widely read that I read all the newspapers and magazines, but I read The New Yorker.
Sunday mornings are for sleeping.
I don't believe in Jesus the Messiah. I do, however, seem to get him more than most who invoke his name.
I don't even own a single gun.
I'm not in the military, but I chose public service as a career to help society.
My eyeglasses frames are not rectangular.
I'm no energy expert, but I know how to pronounce nuclear. It's got two syllables, like Jesus.
I am never going to be nominated for Vice President for either party.
Let me know if I missed anything.
I'm no hockey parent. I play tennis.
I don't live in the heartland or on the frontier. I live in Washington, DC. The horror!
I like beer, but I'm no Joe Six-Pack. In my hometown, I once got laughed at by other customers at a liquor store because of the beer I bought because it wasn't American.
I have 100% Kona coffee flown in from Hawaii every other month. I am a member of a community supported agriculture group. I buy wine from a local vineyard.
I don't drive an SUV. I don't even own a car right now. I'm not complaining about gas prices. I often commute by bicycle.
I graduated from an expensive New England liberal arts college.
I got a passport before the age of 40.
My daughter, when she's born, will not be named Bristol or Piper.
My dog, a poodle. He summers on Martha's Vineyard.
I am not so widely read that I read all the newspapers and magazines, but I read The New Yorker.
Sunday mornings are for sleeping.
I don't believe in Jesus the Messiah. I do, however, seem to get him more than most who invoke his name.
I don't even own a single gun.
I'm not in the military, but I chose public service as a career to help society.
My eyeglasses frames are not rectangular.
I'm no energy expert, but I know how to pronounce nuclear. It's got two syllables, like Jesus.
I am never going to be nominated for Vice President for either party.
Let me know if I missed anything.
Monday, October 6, 2008
Giants looking good
The Giants are 4 and 0. This is a good team. I'm not saying the Giants will repeat as Super Bowl champions, but they are showing that they were no flukes. The NFC East is a good division, so the intra-divisional games will be key.
Offense
The Giants lead the NFL in points and yards. Why?
Eli Manning, 6 TDs, 1 INT, 0 fumbles lost.
Good Eli is here to stay? I sure hope so. He looks good. Turnovers, primarily by Eli, killed the Giants in previous years. This year, only one turnover.
Brandon Jacobs, 95 yards per game, 5.8 yards per rush
What I really like is that Jacobs is raking up those kinds of yards without a lot of rushes. Clinton Portis got 29 rushes on Sunday. That is how you kill a RB. A bruising runner like Jacobs will be done after 5 years of 20+ rushes per game. With the wealth of talent at RB, the Giants can keep Jacobs going until 2015.
This is all happening without the me-first histrionics of Jeremy Shockey, who is with New Orleans and once again injured. Between Burress, Toomer, Smith, Hixon, and maybe even Manningham and Moss there is enough wide receiver talent. Shockey wants to be a slow wide receiver instead of a good tight end, half of whose job involves blocking. Now we have Boss, who is happy to block like a tight end and make some catches. Shockey got a lot of TV accolades for his blocking, but he was good for a stupid holding call once per game. I don't think Boss has been called for holding yet. I will give Shockey some credit, though. The Giants did not utilize him well, so I understand some of his frustration with the team. But, still, good riddance.
Run the ball, keep the chains moving, and don't make mistakes. Classic winning Giants football, especially with a defense like this....
Defense
They are 2nd in points allowed per game, 3rd in yards per game (second against the pass, sixth against the run), and first in sacks per game. The pass defense has been not only up front, but also in the defensive backfield. Ross and Webster have been particularly good. Even Dockery has looked good. When the Giants don't have to use R.W. McQuarters and Sam Madison every down, let alone every game, you know the starting secondary is good. We're still waiting for Kenny Phillips to explode. The surprising thing is that the Giants are putting up these kinds of defensive stats with so few takeaways. I think that will improve in the games to come.
Granted, these stats are through 4 games, not 5 like most teams, because the Giants already had their bye week.
Next up is Cleveland. I think Cleveland than their 1-3 record would indicate. Their losses were to teams with a combined record of 10-4 (Dallas, Pittsburgh, and Baltimore). The Giants should win, but it won't be nearly as easy as Sunday's 44-6 demolition of Seattle on Sunday.
Offense
The Giants lead the NFL in points and yards. Why?
Eli Manning, 6 TDs, 1 INT, 0 fumbles lost.
Good Eli is here to stay? I sure hope so. He looks good. Turnovers, primarily by Eli, killed the Giants in previous years. This year, only one turnover.
Brandon Jacobs, 95 yards per game, 5.8 yards per rush
What I really like is that Jacobs is raking up those kinds of yards without a lot of rushes. Clinton Portis got 29 rushes on Sunday. That is how you kill a RB. A bruising runner like Jacobs will be done after 5 years of 20+ rushes per game. With the wealth of talent at RB, the Giants can keep Jacobs going until 2015.
This is all happening without the me-first histrionics of Jeremy Shockey, who is with New Orleans and once again injured. Between Burress, Toomer, Smith, Hixon, and maybe even Manningham and Moss there is enough wide receiver talent. Shockey wants to be a slow wide receiver instead of a good tight end, half of whose job involves blocking. Now we have Boss, who is happy to block like a tight end and make some catches. Shockey got a lot of TV accolades for his blocking, but he was good for a stupid holding call once per game. I don't think Boss has been called for holding yet. I will give Shockey some credit, though. The Giants did not utilize him well, so I understand some of his frustration with the team. But, still, good riddance.
Run the ball, keep the chains moving, and don't make mistakes. Classic winning Giants football, especially with a defense like this....
Defense
They are 2nd in points allowed per game, 3rd in yards per game (second against the pass, sixth against the run), and first in sacks per game. The pass defense has been not only up front, but also in the defensive backfield. Ross and Webster have been particularly good. Even Dockery has looked good. When the Giants don't have to use R.W. McQuarters and Sam Madison every down, let alone every game, you know the starting secondary is good. We're still waiting for Kenny Phillips to explode. The surprising thing is that the Giants are putting up these kinds of defensive stats with so few takeaways. I think that will improve in the games to come.
Granted, these stats are through 4 games, not 5 like most teams, because the Giants already had their bye week.
Next up is Cleveland. I think Cleveland than their 1-3 record would indicate. Their losses were to teams with a combined record of 10-4 (Dallas, Pittsburgh, and Baltimore). The Giants should win, but it won't be nearly as easy as Sunday's 44-6 demolition of Seattle on Sunday.
Monday, September 29, 2008
Move along, there's nothing to see here
I recently saw this Moveon.org ad on TV:
This is the worst ad I've seen in this election cycle. It looks like a teenager put it together on a MacAir over the weekend.
I suppose the the message is that McCain has something to do with some people who had something to do with the financial crisis and supports Bush's $700 billion bailout. To emphasize the point, the figure of $700 billion moves across the screen, Atari 2600-style, across the screen. To emphasize the point even more, the $700 billion figure turns red. Is this a sign of danger? A statement that it's more red ink? A higher level statement that it's red ink borrowed from Red China.
How exactly does this ad help to defeat McCain? Obama is more likely to support the bailout than McCain. It wouldn't surprise me if McCain goes populist by opposing the bailout in order to stir up the race--my least favorite phrase of 2008, "game-changer."
Also, the ad has so...many...words...can't...pay...attention. Jeez! These liberals are too damn cerebral. Can't they just play to the reptile mind of the undecided American voter? Fight or flight, fear and loathing, right and wrong.
The Republicans knew how to tear down Kerry with those Swift Boat ads. They didn't just make Kerry look bad, they destroyed his credibility and the basis for his candidacy. McCain's support of the war and other things he's said and done in public life have more than enough material to bring him down without resorting to the lies of the Swift Boaters. This ad just doesn't do anything to defeat McCain. It was a waste of money.
The Obama people were correct to try to dissuade Democratic donors from supporting outside organization like Moveon. This Politico article puts forth several arguments why the Obama campaign steered Democratic donors away from outside groups: Legal defense against charges of illegal coordination, their ties to the Clintons, a power grab, to ensure his brand of "new politics," and "message discipline." This Moveon ad shows the virtues of message discipline.
Update: So the bailout plan failed today. Since a majority of the Democrats in the House voted for it, I don't understand why Moveon would attack the measure and McCain's apparent support of it. Maybe I missed it, but I still don't know where Obama was on this bill. Since Pelosi indicated in the big White House meeting that Obama would speak for the Democrats, it is presumable that they wouldn't have reached a deal with the White House and congressional Republicans unless they cleared it with Obama. The McCain campaign apparently took credit for the deal before it failed. Oops.
This is the worst ad I've seen in this election cycle. It looks like a teenager put it together on a MacAir over the weekend.
I suppose the the message is that McCain has something to do with some people who had something to do with the financial crisis and supports Bush's $700 billion bailout. To emphasize the point, the figure of $700 billion moves across the screen, Atari 2600-style, across the screen. To emphasize the point even more, the $700 billion figure turns red. Is this a sign of danger? A statement that it's more red ink? A higher level statement that it's red ink borrowed from Red China.
How exactly does this ad help to defeat McCain? Obama is more likely to support the bailout than McCain. It wouldn't surprise me if McCain goes populist by opposing the bailout in order to stir up the race--my least favorite phrase of 2008, "game-changer."
Also, the ad has so...many...words...can't...pay...attention. Jeez! These liberals are too damn cerebral. Can't they just play to the reptile mind of the undecided American voter? Fight or flight, fear and loathing, right and wrong.
The Republicans knew how to tear down Kerry with those Swift Boat ads. They didn't just make Kerry look bad, they destroyed his credibility and the basis for his candidacy. McCain's support of the war and other things he's said and done in public life have more than enough material to bring him down without resorting to the lies of the Swift Boaters. This ad just doesn't do anything to defeat McCain. It was a waste of money.
The Obama people were correct to try to dissuade Democratic donors from supporting outside organization like Moveon. This Politico article puts forth several arguments why the Obama campaign steered Democratic donors away from outside groups: Legal defense against charges of illegal coordination, their ties to the Clintons, a power grab, to ensure his brand of "new politics," and "message discipline." This Moveon ad shows the virtues of message discipline.
Update: So the bailout plan failed today. Since a majority of the Democrats in the House voted for it, I don't understand why Moveon would attack the measure and McCain's apparent support of it. Maybe I missed it, but I still don't know where Obama was on this bill. Since Pelosi indicated in the big White House meeting that Obama would speak for the Democrats, it is presumable that they wouldn't have reached a deal with the White House and congressional Republicans unless they cleared it with Obama. The McCain campaign apparently took credit for the deal before it failed. Oops.
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
An Era Ends
1992 Red Honda Civic, 17, died of distributor failure and was not revived under a DNR. A brief funeral service was held at 10th Street Auto Repair in northeast Washington, DC, on September 12, 2008. Its carcass will be donated to the Melwood charity in Upper Marlboro, MD. The family requests donations to the Obama campaign in lieu of flowers.
***
I drove that motherfucker into the ground. I had this car for 17 years, but today I made the decision to let it go.
After seeing it in use in recent years, all my old college and high school friends would say the same thing: "Whoa! You still have that car?" Damn straight I still had that car. That car was pretty much the one constant in my life over 17 years, almost half my life.
It was showing its age. The original red color of my vintage Wesleyan decal was now white.
The outside showed more dents as oversized SUVs probably banged into it on a regular basis on the city streets of DC.
Even The Club looked banged up. I wore out the display of my radio/tape deck. The volume control knob has been missing since the 2nd Clinton Administration. On long rides, the seats ceased to be comfortable for my older, surgically repaired back. I put $4000 into this old car over the last 3 years for things like radiator repairs and a new parts such as a water pump, timing belt, and starter.
I knew something was wrong on Sunday when it stalled at a red light in Columbia Heights. But it started right up and we got home just fine. On Monday morning it wouldn't start. I got a ticket for being parked illegally on a street cleaning day, but I'll contest that one and win. That night AAA towed it to 10th Street Auto Repair, the finest mechanics on Capitol Hill. Wednesday I got the diagnosis: New distributor needed. Cost: Over $600.
I decided months ago that that was it, no more major money was going into this car. I had told my wife that $250 was my limit. Before I got the diagnostic results, I considered doubling that amount, but $600 is too much. I needed to let the car go.
I had a lot of good times in that car. I hope many others did, too.
In 1996, Brett and I took a cross-country trip in the middle of winter over the northernmost part of the country. In retrospect, I'm surprised we made it alive. I-80 in Pennsylvania closed due to freezing rain, but we kept on going and slept in the car in the parking lot of a Wawa. Classy, I know!
After stopping in Chicago, we saw Ethan and Whitney in Minneapolis and then stayed in some crazy trucker motor lodge in North Dakota. We still think that waitress totally would have gone to the West Coast with us if we asked her.
The highlight of the trip was watching the first three quarters of the Super Bowl with the entire population of some small town near Steele, ND. We stopped for gas near kickoff time and some guy wearing a t-shirt in below zero weather said, "you guys going to the Super Bowl party? Come on!" So we followed him into a bar, ate a free buffet dinner, and talked with the waitress as we watched the game. She asked about crime on the East Coast and noted that they don't have any in North Dakota because of vigilante justice. I don't recall why we left before the game was over, but I do remember listening to the game on the radio as Neil O'Donnell threw a 4th quarter interception to seal the win for the damn Cowboys.
We flew through Montana at a 100+ mph pace in great weather. Montana was easy, but driving over the Idaho mountains in January? That's scary stuff in a Honda Civic. Every other car's tires seemed to have chains. But we survived and a day later, we arrived in Portland and stayed with Suzanna and Emily for a while. Good times.
The lowest point came in 1999. I needed to move furniture and other stuff to DC right before starting my first job out of law school. Jeff Lev, who lived in DC at the time, needed to attend a cousin's bar mitzvah in Rockville County, NY, that weekend, so I believe we drove up to NJ together and he took the car to NY and would drive it back to DC while I rented a U-Haul for the furniture.
The U-Haul I rented was a dud. The timing belt broke on I-95 a little north of Baltimore. The U-Haul company's 24-hour emergency response service left me for dead. I waited for hours without food or water. I was going crazy and losing cell phone power fast. My pet snake, Molotov, was disturbed by the vibrations caused by thousands of vehicles whizzing by. Jeff didn't have a cell phone, but I figured he'd drive by soon. I looked and looked in a northerly direction for a red Honda. Finally I saw it! I saw my red Honda! I jumped up and down, waved my arms like a madman, and saw Jeff's face. I saw Jeff's face looking straight ahead, paying no mind to the deranged lunatic next to the broken down U-Haul carrying an unhappy king snake. Brutal! Definitely the lowest point in car ownership.
I have a few stats I'd like to share about this car:
Miles: 107,664.
Most miles on one tank of gas: 464 miles ending near Akron, Ohio in 1995. Ethan was my witness. I recently, just to prove a point, got 440 miles on one, much more expensive, tank.
States: 31
Least favorite distinguishing characteristic: Permanent stain of Chinese brown sauce caused the worst speaker ever invited to Wesleyan University. Ask Christianne for details.
Runner up: Mo's cigarette burn (1995).
Speeding tickets incurred: 4 (3 mine, 1 by brother Jordy)
Most listened to CD (or whatever they're called these days) (unofficial statistic): Nothing's Shocking.
Speaking of Jane's, if this is your tape and you want to claim it, I have it.
# of times having sex in car: Zero, but I really thought I was close a few times. (Readership: now's the time to fess up if you ever used it for that purpose).
One final note. Before driving back east in 1996, I stopped in Berkeley to see Damian. As a parting gift, he generously gave me a copy of Love in the Time of Cholera by Gabriel GarcÃa Márquez thinking that I'd like it. The book stayed in the car. After a certain number of years, I decided that the book was just meant to stay in the car. Maybe the book can explain why this is so, but I wouldn't know because I haven't read it. I will read it now. I think I owe it to the car for 17 years of fun, freedom, and reliable service.
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
The G.I. Joe with the kung-fu grip
A recent Morningstar study, picked up by papers across the country, suggests that mutual fund managers should invest in their own funds to demonstrate their confidence. Here's the money quote:
I'm not quite sure if that is the case. Not that I'm defending the mutual fund industry, but I don't want my fund manager making investments in order to directly affect their personal net wealth. When things are bad, I want a focused, data-driven geek, not a pork belly speculator in 1983 as depicted in Trading Places:
Mr. Vanguard Fund Manager, don't make trades to get your kid the G.I. Joe with the king-fu grip.
...the best way to demonstrate a commitment to shareholders is to join them.
I'm not quite sure if that is the case. Not that I'm defending the mutual fund industry, but I don't want my fund manager making investments in order to directly affect their personal net wealth. When things are bad, I want a focused, data-driven geek, not a pork belly speculator in 1983 as depicted in Trading Places:
Randolph Duke: Exactly why do you think the price of pork bellies is going to keep going down, William?
Billy Ray Valentine: Okay, pork belly prices have been dropping all morning, which means that everybody is waiting for it to hit rock bottom, so they can buy low. Which means that the people who own the pork belly contracts are saying, "Hey, we're losing all our damn money, and Christmas is around the corner, and I ain't gonna have no money to buy my son the G.I. Joe with the kung-fu grip! And my wife ain't gonna f... my wife ain't gonna make love to me if I got no money!" So they're panicking right now, they're screaming "SELL! SELL!" to get out before the price keeps dropping. They're panicking out there right now, I can feel it.
[on the ticker machine, the price keeps dropping]
Randolph Duke: He's right, Mortimer! My God, look at it!
Mr. Vanguard Fund Manager, don't make trades to get your kid the G.I. Joe with the king-fu grip.
Friday, June 20, 2008
Hobgoblins out in force
If the American public wanted conformity to all previously held positions, it would be Kucinich vs. Paul.
I can't take another minute of blathering about this flip-flop or that flip-flop. Public finance, off-shore drilling, tax cuts, etc. Politicians lie. Even George Bush lies. As Jamie Lee Curtis pointed out in A Fish Called Wanda, even Margaret Thatcher lies!
All successful politicians lie, but the key is what they lie about.
I don't see Obama's supposed flip-flop on public financing of his campaign to be a matter of principle. His position that his army of small donors is another form of public finance is overstated, but he does not take lobbyist, PAC, or Federal contractor money. That's more than any other successful candidate has done to eliminate the appearance of influence by special interests. I won't begrudge Obama's decision to forgo public money. Circumstances--his ability to raise vast amounts of money--changed. He wants to win. Well, duh! Some of stated that it would be political malpractice for Obama to take public financing.
Same goes for McCain on off-shore drilling. The blowhards have barely mentioned the "maverick" John McCain's reversal on off-shore drilling. Drilling off Florida won't do much to lower gas prices, but there's no overriding matter of principle at stake. It's not like he's ever been an environmentalist. His initial position against off-shore drilling was probably to get votes in Florida in 2000. McCain wants votes!
So what do these episodes tell us? Obama wants to win and McCain wants votes. Shocking in an election year.
The blowhards on TV have said that Obama's change contradicts his "new politics" meme. I've been listening to Obama pretty closely, and unyielding commitment to principle hasn't been his calling card. If anything, he has indicated a flexible approach in contrast to Bush's stubborn refusal to acknowledge reality when it flies in the face of ideology. In November, no one except the stuck-in-mud Public Citizen-types will give a damn whether Obama took public money or not. In fact, if you asked the typical low-information voter whether Obama should fund his campaign with contributions or taxpayer money, the likely answer would be contributions with the question, "taxpayer money goes to these guys???"
The only downside to a $500+ million contribution-funded campaign is that the airwaves will be so saturated with Obama ads that the people will turn against him.
I can't take another minute of blathering about this flip-flop or that flip-flop. Public finance, off-shore drilling, tax cuts, etc. Politicians lie. Even George Bush lies. As Jamie Lee Curtis pointed out in A Fish Called Wanda, even Margaret Thatcher lies!
All successful politicians lie, but the key is what they lie about.
I don't see Obama's supposed flip-flop on public financing of his campaign to be a matter of principle. His position that his army of small donors is another form of public finance is overstated, but he does not take lobbyist, PAC, or Federal contractor money. That's more than any other successful candidate has done to eliminate the appearance of influence by special interests. I won't begrudge Obama's decision to forgo public money. Circumstances--his ability to raise vast amounts of money--changed. He wants to win. Well, duh! Some of stated that it would be political malpractice for Obama to take public financing.
Same goes for McCain on off-shore drilling. The blowhards have barely mentioned the "maverick" John McCain's reversal on off-shore drilling. Drilling off Florida won't do much to lower gas prices, but there's no overriding matter of principle at stake. It's not like he's ever been an environmentalist. His initial position against off-shore drilling was probably to get votes in Florida in 2000. McCain wants votes!
So what do these episodes tell us? Obama wants to win and McCain wants votes. Shocking in an election year.
The blowhards on TV have said that Obama's change contradicts his "new politics" meme. I've been listening to Obama pretty closely, and unyielding commitment to principle hasn't been his calling card. If anything, he has indicated a flexible approach in contrast to Bush's stubborn refusal to acknowledge reality when it flies in the face of ideology. In November, no one except the stuck-in-mud Public Citizen-types will give a damn whether Obama took public money or not. In fact, if you asked the typical low-information voter whether Obama should fund his campaign with contributions or taxpayer money, the likely answer would be contributions with the question, "taxpayer money goes to these guys???"
The only downside to a $500+ million contribution-funded campaign is that the airwaves will be so saturated with Obama ads that the people will turn against him.
Friday, June 6, 2008
Why Hillary Lost
Major media outlets are running "why Hillary lost" pieces every day, sometimes several per day. She didn't run in caucuses. She didn't take Obama seriously. She didn't have a single message. Sniper fire in Bosnia. Bill losing his marbles. Racial divisions. Blah blah blah. The media has been consumed by the horse race by months, so that's where the media looks.
The real answer is Iraq. If Hillary Clinton had voted against the war, she would be the nominee. She did not vote for it because she believed in it. It was part of her campaign to suck up to the militarists. If she had been the "I told you so" candidate, Obama's campaign wouldn't have had so much oxygen. John Edwards also voted for the way, but he had the decency to admit error. Clinton tried to defend her vote until it was too late.
The real answer is Iraq. If Hillary Clinton had voted against the war, she would be the nominee. She did not vote for it because she believed in it. It was part of her campaign to suck up to the militarists. If she had been the "I told you so" candidate, Obama's campaign wouldn't have had so much oxygen. John Edwards also voted for the way, but he had the decency to admit error. Clinton tried to defend her vote until it was too late.
Patsies
If a Democratic political appointee in the Defense Department had shut down a counterintelligence inquiry involving the Secretary of Defense and leading to the Office of the Vice President, impeachment proceedings would begin and it would be BREAKING NEWS all damn week.
But since it's a Republican administration, barely a peep.
This is just alarming. In the neocons' zeal to wage war against Iraq, they were duped by the Iranians. I thought the Iranians lucked into it, but they have their act together.
But since it's a Republican administration, barely a peep.
This is just alarming. In the neocons' zeal to wage war against Iraq, they were duped by the Iranians. I thought the Iranians lucked into it, but they have their act together.
Wednesday, June 4, 2008
Lanny Davis is not in his time or place
If I've said it once, I've said it a thousand times: Lanny Davis would have made a great Stalinist. Starting with a wrong premise, he argues so well and without shame.
Trotsky? Never heard of him.
His communication skills and the little eyes, glasses, and smirk remind me Goebbels.
Trotsky? Never heard of him.
His communication skills and the little eyes, glasses, and smirk remind me Goebbels.
Breaking news
It's 9 PM. MSNBC has "BREAKING NEWS" that Hillary Clinton is dropping out! After how many hours of non-stop coverage does a story cease to become a breaking story? Just sayin'.
Update @ 10:23 PM. Anderson Cooper Breaking News: Sen. Clinton's Campaign to End Saturday.
I better not wake up to the same breaking news.
Update @ 10:23 PM. Anderson Cooper Breaking News: Sen. Clinton's Campaign to End Saturday.
I better not wake up to the same breaking news.
Tuesday, June 3, 2008
Obama and Clinton play chess
Bad weather interfered with my satellite signal, so I didn't watch Clinton's speech, but it seems Clinton gave an extremely ungracious non-concession speech. Can she do more to sabotage Obama's chance in 2008) so she could run in 2012)? The next week will show a lot, but Obama has a real chess match on his hands.
If she forces Obama to ask her to be the VP, she could decline it and make him look like a fool. McCain will then say, "if you can't handle Hillary Clinton, how are you going to handle Ahmadinejad in these direct negotiations of yours?"
If she does accept the offer, the McCain line is just as valid, and then he's got dis-loyalists in his campaign and, hopefully, Administration. She wouldn't be accepting of a ceremonial role--she's be like Cheney with her minions spread throughout the Executive Branch. Yuck!
Finally, if he doesn't offer her the VP position, she could knee-cap him throughout the campaign.
Did you hear that it was reported by Fineman of MSNBC that the Clinton campaign is demanding that if she isn't offered the VP slot, then no woman should?
I am no longer on the Webb for VP bandwagon. I think he's got a lot of baggage, especially on women's rights. Not the sort of signal to send right now. I am thinking that Clark may be a good choice. Since he's allied with the Clintons, he may be acceptable to her.
First move goes to white.
If she forces Obama to ask her to be the VP, she could decline it and make him look like a fool. McCain will then say, "if you can't handle Hillary Clinton, how are you going to handle Ahmadinejad in these direct negotiations of yours?"
If she does accept the offer, the McCain line is just as valid, and then he's got dis-loyalists in his campaign and, hopefully, Administration. She wouldn't be accepting of a ceremonial role--she's be like Cheney with her minions spread throughout the Executive Branch. Yuck!
Finally, if he doesn't offer her the VP position, she could knee-cap him throughout the campaign.
Did you hear that it was reported by Fineman of MSNBC that the Clinton campaign is demanding that if she isn't offered the VP slot, then no woman should?
I am no longer on the Webb for VP bandwagon. I think he's got a lot of baggage, especially on women's rights. Not the sort of signal to send right now. I am thinking that Clark may be a good choice. Since he's allied with the Clintons, he may be acceptable to her.
First move goes to white.
Monday, June 2, 2008
Democracy in the Democratic Party
I'm glad the Michigan and Florida delegate issue seems to be resolved. Just as umpires and referees shouldn't make game-changing decisions with bad or ticky-tack calls, the DNC shouldn't make similar decisions this far into the primary season.
From within Hillaryland and from without, there is a lot of hand-wringing about the dis/enfranchisement, democracy, one-person-one-vote (of a fraction thereof), etc. etc. etc. The fact of the matter is that the primary and caucus system is inherently undemocratic.
First all of, no voting process that takes over 5 months can be said to be democratic. Iowa voted over 5 months before Montana and South Dakota. If states like New Jersey and California were to vote on Tuesday, the results would be very different than their earlier returns.
Second, the delegate system is weighted in favor of certain voters based on local democratic voting strength. It's unclear whether this apportionment system has had the effect of helping Obama or Clinton. Nevertheless, some votes are designed to be worth more than others.
Then there's the superdelegates. 'nuff said. They may be elected officials in many case, but they were not elected to select the presidential nominee. Since all Senators and representatives are superdelegates, they artificially inflate the importance of small states.
The U.S. electoral system only approximates democracy, so perhaps that's the best we can hope from the national party nomination process. By any measure, there is no palpable "will of the voters" favoring Obama over Clinton. The difference between pledged delegates is negligible. Even when you view the popular vote in any fair manner, it is basically a tie. Obama will be the nominee because he played the game better. The name of the game is delegates, and Obama has nearly enough already. The system may be flawed, but that's life.
I hope the Obama campaign's strategic mastery shows who is more ready to be President. We will not experience an Obama Administration unless the Clinton supporters come home. They need to recognize the flaws inherent in the system, get over their frustrations, and come home. She may have moderate white women; Obama may have African-Americans and urban liberals--the Democratic Party in a nutshell.
From within Hillaryland and from without, there is a lot of hand-wringing about the dis/enfranchisement, democracy, one-person-one-vote (of a fraction thereof), etc. etc. etc. The fact of the matter is that the primary and caucus system is inherently undemocratic.
First all of, no voting process that takes over 5 months can be said to be democratic. Iowa voted over 5 months before Montana and South Dakota. If states like New Jersey and California were to vote on Tuesday, the results would be very different than their earlier returns.
Second, the delegate system is weighted in favor of certain voters based on local democratic voting strength. It's unclear whether this apportionment system has had the effect of helping Obama or Clinton. Nevertheless, some votes are designed to be worth more than others.
Then there's the superdelegates. 'nuff said. They may be elected officials in many case, but they were not elected to select the presidential nominee. Since all Senators and representatives are superdelegates, they artificially inflate the importance of small states.
The U.S. electoral system only approximates democracy, so perhaps that's the best we can hope from the national party nomination process. By any measure, there is no palpable "will of the voters" favoring Obama over Clinton. The difference between pledged delegates is negligible. Even when you view the popular vote in any fair manner, it is basically a tie. Obama will be the nominee because he played the game better. The name of the game is delegates, and Obama has nearly enough already. The system may be flawed, but that's life.
I hope the Obama campaign's strategic mastery shows who is more ready to be President. We will not experience an Obama Administration unless the Clinton supporters come home. They need to recognize the flaws inherent in the system, get over their frustrations, and come home. She may have moderate white women; Obama may have African-Americans and urban liberals--the Democratic Party in a nutshell.
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Obama's in better shape than Bill Clinton was
About 16 years ago, Bill Clinton had trouble closing the deal with Democrats. People kept on voting for the weird Jerry Brown. Brown even won the March Connecticut primary and then came close in Wisconsin. Clinton's victory in New York pretty much sealed the nomination, but two months later, my home state of New Jersey, one of the last states to vote in the primaries, showed no enthusiasm for the presumptive nominee. I remember one family friend, a strong Democrat, describing her vote this way, "Well, I guess I should vote for Clinton (sigh)."
Things looked bleak. Clinton was not well-liked by Democrats. He was seen by independents as an elitist, draft-dodging, cheating, Slick Willie. Ross Perot was energizing people, but Clinton was flailing, hoping for coverage as he pandered, pandered, pandered and felt pain all across America.
In June 1992, the Clinton campaign finally showed signs of life, and the convention re-introduced America to the Clinton family. So I'm not worried about Obama's problems with Eastern whites right now. He's got time to make up the ground. He's still relative newcomer to politics, and I think the convention will successfully introduce him to the American public. Unless, of course, Hillary Clinton ruins it.
I am still shocked that Bill Clinton's wife, the candidate's wife who didn't want to stay home and bake cookies, has become a working-class hero. That's got to be a media creation. To some extent, especially in Appalachia, it's because she's the white candidate. Yes, folks, there's racism in Appalachia. A shocker, I know. If 21% of the voters of Kentucky say race was important to their vote, there's another 21% of voters who didn't admit it.
Things looked bleak. Clinton was not well-liked by Democrats. He was seen by independents as an elitist, draft-dodging, cheating, Slick Willie. Ross Perot was energizing people, but Clinton was flailing, hoping for coverage as he pandered, pandered, pandered and felt pain all across America.
In June 1992, the Clinton campaign finally showed signs of life, and the convention re-introduced America to the Clinton family. So I'm not worried about Obama's problems with Eastern whites right now. He's got time to make up the ground. He's still relative newcomer to politics, and I think the convention will successfully introduce him to the American public. Unless, of course, Hillary Clinton ruins it.
I am still shocked that Bill Clinton's wife, the candidate's wife who didn't want to stay home and bake cookies, has become a working-class hero. That's got to be a media creation. To some extent, especially in Appalachia, it's because she's the white candidate. Yes, folks, there's racism in Appalachia. A shocker, I know. If 21% of the voters of Kentucky say race was important to their vote, there's another 21% of voters who didn't admit it.
Sunday, May 11, 2008
Pentagon Propaganda
A number of media commentators have noticed the deafening silence of the major broadcasters in response to the New York Times article concerning their use of military experts or correspondents who were tied to Rumsfeld's Pentagon. In some cases, these former military officers were literally repeating the Pentagon talking points. CNN, you should be ashamed of yourself!
I had a suspicion that many of them could not be totally candid for fear of alienating their peers, but it appears that there was a monetary incentive as well. Many of them had business with the Pentagon. There's little doubt that, given its track record, this Administration would have retaliated against them and their business interests if they didn't toe the party line about Iraq.
Glenn Greenwald here and here runs through the facts in great detail and links to a very strong legal analysis. This legal analysis, by prwatch.org, hints, but does not explicitly state, that there are really no consequences for an illegal propaganda program. There is no criminal or civil penalty. The restriction is an appropriation restriction, meaning the agency didn't have money for this purpose. At best, a report to the President identifying the Federal employees responsible will be sent. It's hard to see Bush doing anything against the employees.
In order to strengthen the law, I suggest that individuals who knowingly participate in illegal covert propaganda be "debarred" by the Federal government, meaning making them ineligible to receive government contracts, grants, and other Federal money. Since the generals in this case, and the PR flacks in previous cases under the Bush Administration were actively seeking government contracts, debarment may be an adequate deterrent.
I had a suspicion that many of them could not be totally candid for fear of alienating their peers, but it appears that there was a monetary incentive as well. Many of them had business with the Pentagon. There's little doubt that, given its track record, this Administration would have retaliated against them and their business interests if they didn't toe the party line about Iraq.
Glenn Greenwald here and here runs through the facts in great detail and links to a very strong legal analysis. This legal analysis, by prwatch.org, hints, but does not explicitly state, that there are really no consequences for an illegal propaganda program. There is no criminal or civil penalty. The restriction is an appropriation restriction, meaning the agency didn't have money for this purpose. At best, a report to the President identifying the Federal employees responsible will be sent. It's hard to see Bush doing anything against the employees.
In order to strengthen the law, I suggest that individuals who knowingly participate in illegal covert propaganda be "debarred" by the Federal government, meaning making them ineligible to receive government contracts, grants, and other Federal money. Since the generals in this case, and the PR flacks in previous cases under the Bush Administration were actively seeking government contracts, debarment may be an adequate deterrent.
Saturday, May 10, 2008
McCain stumbles
A bad few days for McCain:
1) Sugar Momma Cindy won't release her tax returns, ever! Let's see how long that lasts. His campaign receives free, unlimited use of her company's plane because of a loophole in a law that McCain had written, so her wealth is an issue.
2) Arianna says McCain said he didn't vote for George Bush in 2000. I finally gained a little respect for the man, but then he denied it. Let him brag about voting for Bush for the next several months. If I were Obama, I'd use this in a debate.
3) A former lobbyist for the Myanmar junta was tapped by McCain to run the GOP convention. McCain sure does like lobbyists. If lobbyists are the sort of people he chooses to run his campaign, think of the people he's pick for the government.
His campaign hasn't proven itself. McCain didn't really "win" the nomination so much as the other bozo candidates lost. McCain was the last man standing. If these are examples of the deftness of the McCain campaign, I can't wait for the fall season!
1) Sugar Momma Cindy won't release her tax returns, ever! Let's see how long that lasts. His campaign receives free, unlimited use of her company's plane because of a loophole in a law that McCain had written, so her wealth is an issue.
2) Arianna says McCain said he didn't vote for George Bush in 2000. I finally gained a little respect for the man, but then he denied it. Let him brag about voting for Bush for the next several months. If I were Obama, I'd use this in a debate.
3) A former lobbyist for the Myanmar junta was tapped by McCain to run the GOP convention. McCain sure does like lobbyists. If lobbyists are the sort of people he chooses to run his campaign, think of the people he's pick for the government.
His campaign hasn't proven itself. McCain didn't really "win" the nomination so much as the other bozo candidates lost. McCain was the last man standing. If these are examples of the deftness of the McCain campaign, I can't wait for the fall season!
Monday, May 5, 2008
Just deplorable
I didn't want to start an anti-Hillary Clinton blog, but you blog about the candidates you have, not the candidate you want. Speaking of horrendous paraphrases, this is just the worst:
Hillary Clinton is now comparing the plight of industrial workers in the US to Holocaust victims. This society hypes up every small gaffe into a major frickin' deal, but this is the most deplorable thing I have ever heard a candidate say in the last 20 years. There is no comparison between the Holocaust and the economic struggles of Indiana. Not a literal connection. There is not even a touch of truth. Even Jeremiah Wright knows better.
Hillary apparently made this comment on April 28th. You know it would have been all over the place if the other candidate had made this remark.
“They came for the steel companies and nobody said anything. They came for the auto companies and nobody said anything. They came for the office companies, people who did white-collar service jobs, and no one said anything. And they came for the professional jobs that could be outsourced, and nobody said anything.”
Hillary Clinton is now comparing the plight of industrial workers in the US to Holocaust victims. This society hypes up every small gaffe into a major frickin' deal, but this is the most deplorable thing I have ever heard a candidate say in the last 20 years. There is no comparison between the Holocaust and the economic struggles of Indiana. Not a literal connection. There is not even a touch of truth. Even Jeremiah Wright knows better.
Hillary apparently made this comment on April 28th. You know it would have been all over the place if the other candidate had made this remark.
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
Keep on truckin'
I haven't had much time for blogging lately. In order to clear my basement of stuff so that a contractor can finish it, I've been reviewing the evidence of the excess consumerism in my life. Shoot, I haven't played my XBox since I met my wife, so it's got to go. Goodbye DVD and CD cases, but I'm keeping the liner notes for Jethro Tull's "Crest of a Knave"--it's classic. Bye-bye wife's 4S green skis. The Fort Totten Waste Transfer Station--sometimes called the DC dump--will give you a good home.
Speaking of the DC dump, I tried to dispose of certain items in an environmentally responsible way, but failed. Twice a year, the DC government has a household hazardous waste disposal and recycling day. After dropping off non-hazwaste at the dump, we drove out to the special area for the hazwaste disposal, but the street was like a parking lot for about a mile.
I am glad that the Mayor is taking remedial action and is making plans for hazwaste drop-offs on the weekends. That's what I like about the Mayor. A problem is identified, potential solutions are identified, and action is taken. When Marion Barry was mayor, problems were identified, no one in government would take responsibility, and nothing would change. Mayor Williams was definitely better, but I don't think he would really care about an issue with such small monetary implications. Mayor Fenty, you are doing a great job. Now improve those schools and fix up Eastern Market and you will become the new Mayor-for-Life.
Speaking of the ill-fated hazwaste drop off, some people waited on line for so long that they almost ran out of gas. Unfortunately, that didn't happen to any of the truckers who protested high gas prices by driving around downtown Washington and Capitol Hill. Of all the protests in DC that I have seen, this was by far the lamest. Okay, gas prices are high, supply is low, demand is high, the dollar is low. So you protest to waste gallons and gallons of it and pollute myneighborhood? I'll remember this, truckers!
This is the trucker platform:
The truckers said they want Congress to issue an immediate cap on gasoline, diesel and heating oil prices. They are demanding a $2 a gallon cap on all of the fuels.
That's workable. While Congress unilaterally caps prices of a global commodity, it might was well move the West Coast closer to the East Coast to make it cheaper to drive cross-country.
Then there's the McCain-Clinton plan to eliminate the gas tax for the summer. Gas taxes pay for roads and transit. Without those taxes, either construction or maintenance stops or we borrow more money from the Chinese to pay for it. Good for Obama for calling out his opponents on this. As an Obama supporter, I would be embarrassed if he took the McCain-Clinton position. Are the Clinton supporters capable of embarrassment at this point? She went on O'Reilly. O'Reilly!
Updated:
That's our only choice? Ye Gods! This has Bill Clinton's fingerprints all over it. It is reminiscent of Bill Clinton's demagogery over Paul Tsongas's proposal for 50 cent gas tax increase over 10 years in 1992. I was embarrassed, but still drank the aid. My standards have apparently gotten higher, but the Clintons' have not.
Speaking of the DC dump, I tried to dispose of certain items in an environmentally responsible way, but failed. Twice a year, the DC government has a household hazardous waste disposal and recycling day. After dropping off non-hazwaste at the dump, we drove out to the special area for the hazwaste disposal, but the street was like a parking lot for about a mile.
"The worst thing would be that, out of frustration, people put this stuff in the regular waste stream."We did the worst thing. We made a quick u-turn and headed for the dump. Yes, I threw away my copper speaker wires in the normal waste chain. Thankfully, a salvager took it and hauled it away. That is true recycling! We didn't leave anything truly hazardous--like paint--at the dump, so don't be too hard on us.
I am glad that the Mayor is taking remedial action and is making plans for hazwaste drop-offs on the weekends. That's what I like about the Mayor. A problem is identified, potential solutions are identified, and action is taken. When Marion Barry was mayor, problems were identified, no one in government would take responsibility, and nothing would change. Mayor Williams was definitely better, but I don't think he would really care about an issue with such small monetary implications. Mayor Fenty, you are doing a great job. Now improve those schools and fix up Eastern Market and you will become the new Mayor-for-Life.
Speaking of the ill-fated hazwaste drop off, some people waited on line for so long that they almost ran out of gas. Unfortunately, that didn't happen to any of the truckers who protested high gas prices by driving around downtown Washington and Capitol Hill. Of all the protests in DC that I have seen, this was by far the lamest. Okay, gas prices are high, supply is low, demand is high, the dollar is low. So you protest to waste gallons and gallons of it and pollute myneighborhood? I'll remember this, truckers!
This is the trucker platform:
The truckers said they want Congress to issue an immediate cap on gasoline, diesel and heating oil prices. They are demanding a $2 a gallon cap on all of the fuels.
That's workable. While Congress unilaterally caps prices of a global commodity, it might was well move the West Coast closer to the East Coast to make it cheaper to drive cross-country.
Then there's the McCain-Clinton plan to eliminate the gas tax for the summer. Gas taxes pay for roads and transit. Without those taxes, either construction or maintenance stops or we borrow more money from the Chinese to pay for it. Good for Obama for calling out his opponents on this. As an Obama supporter, I would be embarrassed if he took the McCain-Clinton position. Are the Clinton supporters capable of embarrassment at this point? She went on O'Reilly. O'Reilly!
Updated:
"I find it frankly a little offensive that people who don't have to worry about filling up their gas tank or what they buy when they go to the supermarket, think that it's somehow illegitimate to provide relief for the millions and millions of Americans who are on the brink of losing their jobs, unable to keep up with their daily expenses," she said.
Later, in Jeffersonville, Indiana, Clinton said she wanted to put her tax proposal before Congress.
"I believe it would be important to get every member of Congress on record. Do they stand with the hard-pressed Americans who are trying to pay their gas bills at the gas station or do they once again stand with the oil companies?," Clinton asked.
That's our only choice? Ye Gods! This has Bill Clinton's fingerprints all over it. It is reminiscent of Bill Clinton's demagogery over Paul Tsongas's proposal for 50 cent gas tax increase over 10 years in 1992. I was embarrassed, but still drank the aid. My standards have apparently gotten higher, but the Clintons' have not.
Saturday, March 22, 2008
Hillary is no longer a female candidate
Gov. Bill Richardson endorsed Barack Obama yesterday. I know, 'cuz I watched it live on CNN.
I had a feeling--which I should have shared on this blog to prove that I had this feeling--that Richardson wasn't going to endorse Hillary. Just look at Bill's face here. Does he look like he's having fun during the most exciting sports event ever?
I referred to Senator Hillary Clinton as "Hillary" in the preceding paragraph deliberatively. Her campaign has thrilled lots of people--men and women--by being the most successful female candidate for President. Until now, I was willing to accept the concept that she was really a female candidate, and as a liberal Dem, I thought that was pretty cool.
But the reaction of the Clinton campaign to Richardson's endorsement shows that she is not the first female candidate. She is from a long line of candidates who have run on the coattails of relatives who had been President or prominent in other ways.
Per the New York Times, James Carville has compared Bill Richardson to Judas (imagine the uproar if Richardson were also Jewish!). The idea that Richardson owes Hillary Clinton is ludicrous. Pray tell, James, what has Hillary Clinton ever done for Bill Richardson? Did she appointment him Secretary of Energy? Did she appoint him Ambassador to the United Nations?
Richardson owes nothing to Senator Hillary Clinton just because her husband appointed him to high government positions. If she is a candidate running on her own merits, she and her campaign should not take for granted the support of anyone who served under Bill.
The airwaves and blogs are awash with debate over the effect of the Richardson endorsement. Votes, superdelegates, Latino voters, etc. Maybe he just saw which way the wind was blowing. Maybe Obama's speech on race truly inspired him. Here's an attempt to add value to the debate with some wild speculation.
Richardson thought Hillary would ask him to be her Vice Presidential nominee. If he said yes, he's be marginalized for 4-8 years. If he said no, he's be out of the Administration.
In contrast, there's no way that Obama would go all brown on the ticket. (My best guess for VP: Jim Webb of Virginia.) Richardson, however, is a natural choice as Secretary of State in an Obama Administration. If you want a foreign policy that includes talking to dictators, Richardson is your man.
While we're on the subject of the Clintons, Bill is a major reason why I think Obama should not even ask Hillary Clinton to be the VP nominee. He has damaged Obama with biting comments about his record, race, and patriotism. Clinton has used race as a wedge issue in 1992. Not that I think that Hillary would accept the VP slot, but Bill is also just too unpredictable and scandal-prone. Why invite a financial or sex scandal into your White House?
I had a feeling--which I should have shared on this blog to prove that I had this feeling--that Richardson wasn't going to endorse Hillary. Just look at Bill's face here. Does he look like he's having fun during the most exciting sports event ever?
I referred to Senator Hillary Clinton as "Hillary" in the preceding paragraph deliberatively. Her campaign has thrilled lots of people--men and women--by being the most successful female candidate for President. Until now, I was willing to accept the concept that she was really a female candidate, and as a liberal Dem, I thought that was pretty cool.
But the reaction of the Clinton campaign to Richardson's endorsement shows that she is not the first female candidate. She is from a long line of candidates who have run on the coattails of relatives who had been President or prominent in other ways.
Per the New York Times, James Carville has compared Bill Richardson to Judas (imagine the uproar if Richardson were also Jewish!). The idea that Richardson owes Hillary Clinton is ludicrous. Pray tell, James, what has Hillary Clinton ever done for Bill Richardson? Did she appointment him Secretary of Energy? Did she appoint him Ambassador to the United Nations?
Richardson owes nothing to Senator Hillary Clinton just because her husband appointed him to high government positions. If she is a candidate running on her own merits, she and her campaign should not take for granted the support of anyone who served under Bill.
The airwaves and blogs are awash with debate over the effect of the Richardson endorsement. Votes, superdelegates, Latino voters, etc. Maybe he just saw which way the wind was blowing. Maybe Obama's speech on race truly inspired him. Here's an attempt to add value to the debate with some wild speculation.
Richardson thought Hillary would ask him to be her Vice Presidential nominee. If he said yes, he's be marginalized for 4-8 years. If he said no, he's be out of the Administration.
In contrast, there's no way that Obama would go all brown on the ticket. (My best guess for VP: Jim Webb of Virginia.) Richardson, however, is a natural choice as Secretary of State in an Obama Administration. If you want a foreign policy that includes talking to dictators, Richardson is your man.
While we're on the subject of the Clintons, Bill is a major reason why I think Obama should not even ask Hillary Clinton to be the VP nominee. He has damaged Obama with biting comments about his record, race, and patriotism. Clinton has used race as a wedge issue in 1992. Not that I think that Hillary would accept the VP slot, but Bill is also just too unpredictable and scandal-prone. Why invite a financial or sex scandal into your White House?
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
America: Shocked and Awed
Has it really been five years since Bush blindly took us to war against Iraq?
Other bloggers (no link required) have catalogued the litany of rosy scenarios put forth by Bush, Cheney, McCain and all the others. Remember how easy it would be to invade Iraq, overthrow its dictator, install a new government, and pump that oil at 1990s prices? The sad thing is that so many Americans believed the bullshit. I can state, with complete honesty, that I was never for it. The invasion and the overthrowing would be the easy part, but I knew that creating a new functioning government and society would be extremely difficult. And I didn't need to read a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) to tell me that.
White House mouthpiece Michael Gordon of the New York Times wrote an interesting piece a few days ago which blames Paul Bremer, not Bush, for disbanding the Iraqi army, a decision which the CW declares to have been pretty stupid:
According to the article, on March 12, 2003, Bush approved a plan that includes using the Iraq military as a building-block of a new Iraqi society. On May 22, 2003, Bush approves the dismantling of the Iraqi article and no one raises a peep:
So, what happened? According to Gordon:
Well, who was at the meeting? Colin Powell was in Paris--on business, I presume--and so could not attend. Here's Powell's take on the record:
Sounds like another neo-con plot gone awry. Rumsfeld informally approved the the dismantling before the videocon with Bush. Given Cheney's mastery of bureaucratic infighting, he probably waited until Powell was out of the country to put this issue before Bush. Bush either didn't really pay much attention to the "plan" in the first place and so didn't think it would be a big deal or he was too simpleminded to understand its implications. Assuming Rice told the truth to Powell that she did not know in advance, she was too much of a lightweight to incur the wrath of Cheney and Rumseld, so she asked no serious questions. Her line to Powell that she was caught by surprise is pracically malpractice. As the President's National Security Advisor, how does she not know in advance the agenda of a national security meeting and weigh in?
But enough about Iraq....let's talk about Vietnam. After Vietnam, the American public was painfully aware of the human and social costs to a failed war. So the public was skeptical of all military involvement. If you recall, even Reagan's actions in Grenada and against Libya were controversial. However, Panama stirred people up with the yellow ribbons and made people "proud to be Americans (again)".
After Panama came the Gulf War, which also came with pretty, pretty ribbons, and few physical casualties. Then, thanks to Bill Clinton, the public was introduced to war by remote control--namely, the Kosovo War. War was no longer a bloody, dirty, painful thing for society. It became a sport! Go America!
For the first time in American history, the public was for military intervention against anyone. So when Bush said in March, "let's get rid of Saddam," the public responded, "yeah, sure, I'm not watching baseball anymore and football season doesn't start 'til September, so I could watch a good war on TV". (Plus, there was that whole September 11th thing that made it really easy to lump all Arab countries together--I'll leave that theme to other bloggers.)
So, where are we now? The good news is that the public might want to think about the consequences before it supports military involvement. The bad news is that when the national interest truly requires military action, the public may not be on-board.
Other bloggers (no link required) have catalogued the litany of rosy scenarios put forth by Bush, Cheney, McCain and all the others. Remember how easy it would be to invade Iraq, overthrow its dictator, install a new government, and pump that oil at 1990s prices? The sad thing is that so many Americans believed the bullshit. I can state, with complete honesty, that I was never for it. The invasion and the overthrowing would be the easy part, but I knew that creating a new functioning government and society would be extremely difficult. And I didn't need to read a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) to tell me that.
White House mouthpiece Michael Gordon of the New York Times wrote an interesting piece a few days ago which blames Paul Bremer, not Bush, for disbanding the Iraqi army, a decision which the CW declares to have been pretty stupid:
Mr. Bremer’s decree reversed an earlier plan — one that would have relied on the Iraqi military to help secure and rebuild the country, and had been approved at a White House meeting that Mr. Bush convened just 10 weeks earlier.
According to the article, on March 12, 2003, Bush approved a plan that includes using the Iraq military as a building-block of a new Iraqi society. On May 22, 2003, Bush approves the dismantling of the Iraqi article and no one raises a peep:
while Mr. Bush endorsed Mr. Bremer’s plan in the May 22 meeting, the decision was made without thorough consultations within government, and without the counsel of the secretary of state or the senior American commander in Iraq, said the commander, Lt. Gen. David D. McKiernan.
So, what happened? According to Gordon:
Mr. Bremer, through a videoconference, was part of a National Security Council meeting held in the White House Situation Room, and said that he was planning to issue the decree disbanding the army. Mr. Bush seemed satisfied, and no officials spoke up to object, according to Mr. Bremer and other participants.
Well, who was at the meeting? Colin Powell was in Paris--on business, I presume--and so could not attend. Here's Powell's take on the record:
Mr. Powell, who views the decree as a major blunder, later asked Condoleezza Rice, who was serving as Mr. Bush’s national security adviser, for an explanation.
“I talked to Rice and said, ‘Condi, what happened?’ ” he recalled. “And her reaction was: ‘I was surprised too, but it is a decision that has been made and the president is standing behind Jerry’s decision. Jerry is the guy on the ground.’ And there was no further debate about it.”
Sounds like another neo-con plot gone awry. Rumsfeld informally approved the the dismantling before the videocon with Bush. Given Cheney's mastery of bureaucratic infighting, he probably waited until Powell was out of the country to put this issue before Bush. Bush either didn't really pay much attention to the "plan" in the first place and so didn't think it would be a big deal or he was too simpleminded to understand its implications. Assuming Rice told the truth to Powell that she did not know in advance, she was too much of a lightweight to incur the wrath of Cheney and Rumseld, so she asked no serious questions. Her line to Powell that she was caught by surprise is pracically malpractice. As the President's National Security Advisor, how does she not know in advance the agenda of a national security meeting and weigh in?
But enough about Iraq....let's talk about Vietnam. After Vietnam, the American public was painfully aware of the human and social costs to a failed war. So the public was skeptical of all military involvement. If you recall, even Reagan's actions in Grenada and against Libya were controversial. However, Panama stirred people up with the yellow ribbons and made people "proud to be Americans (again)".
After Panama came the Gulf War, which also came with pretty, pretty ribbons, and few physical casualties. Then, thanks to Bill Clinton, the public was introduced to war by remote control--namely, the Kosovo War. War was no longer a bloody, dirty, painful thing for society. It became a sport! Go America!
For the first time in American history, the public was for military intervention against anyone. So when Bush said in March, "let's get rid of Saddam," the public responded, "yeah, sure, I'm not watching baseball anymore and football season doesn't start 'til September, so I could watch a good war on TV". (Plus, there was that whole September 11th thing that made it really easy to lump all Arab countries together--I'll leave that theme to other bloggers.)
So, where are we now? The good news is that the public might want to think about the consequences before it supports military involvement. The bad news is that when the national interest truly requires military action, the public may not be on-board.
Monday, March 10, 2008
Coca leaf
Thanks to the Drug Policy Alliance for alerting me to the International Narcotics Control Board (INCB) 2007 annual report. It calls for Peru and Bolivia to ban non-medical and non-scientific purposes of the coca leaf.
I've been to Peru. That coca leaf tea really helps to prevent altitude sickness. At altitudes of over 10,000 feet, altitude sickness could be severe. Instead of criminalizing traditional uses of the coca leaf, we should ship that tea to every ski lodge in the Rockies and Alps.
In contrast to the pressure on Peru and Bolivia, the U.S. got a free pass. Not a single recommendation. Not even a mention of renegade province California. The word "California" does not appear in the North America section of the report. Even worse, the report favorably portrays the ridiculous TV ads that say if you buy a bag of weed, the terrorists win.
I've been to Peru. That coca leaf tea really helps to prevent altitude sickness. At altitudes of over 10,000 feet, altitude sickness could be severe. Instead of criminalizing traditional uses of the coca leaf, we should ship that tea to every ski lodge in the Rockies and Alps.
In contrast to the pressure on Peru and Bolivia, the U.S. got a free pass. Not a single recommendation. Not even a mention of renegade province California. The word "California" does not appear in the North America section of the report. Even worse, the report favorably portrays the ridiculous TV ads that say if you buy a bag of weed, the terrorists win.
Air Force tanker deal
Boeing loses out to Airbus. Republicans and Democrats united in outrage. Lou Dobbs is seething.
Whenever the Republicans and Democrats agree on something, it is usually a mistake. This must be a good deal for taxpayers.
Whenever the Republicans and Democrats agree on something, it is usually a mistake. This must be a good deal for taxpayers.
Sunday, March 9, 2008
First road race
I just ran a St. Patrick's Day 8k, my first road race. I finished between a 9 and 10-mile pace. Thanks to Gotta Run in Arlington for equipping me with the right sneaks and having a 40% sale on winter running clothes.
Here's the course map (approximately):
Race-time temperature at 9 AM: 32 degrees and windy. To give you an example of the wind, this is what the wind did last night:
Extenuating circumstances: The first "spring forward" daylight savings morning, so it was extra hard to get up this morning. Thanks to the local coffee shop (not the one seized by the DC tax authorities) for a good 12-oz cup on the way to the Metro.
Post-race report: My left ankle/Achilles is a little sore from not wearing the right sneakers for a few weeks. I hope to continue running for the...
Next race: the April 6th Cherry Blossom 10-miler.
Now I am back home and actually enjoyed Meet the Press this morning. Thank God, no Carville/Matalin garbage-fest.
The topic was the on-going Democratic circular firing squad. I am afraid this nomination fight isn't going to end well for Democrats. Neither one can get a majority of delegates without the superdelegates.
The final result needs to fair in fact and appearance. This Florida and Michigan delegate clusterfuck really need to be sorted out, one way or another. It's hard to see women, blacks, and younger voters coming together behind one candidate in the summer and fall unless both candidates are on the ticket.
I doubt Hillary would accept the VP position given her intimate familiarity with the powerlessness of the position and her age. Is it up to Obama to yield, even if he is leading in elected delegates and/or total votes and the polls?
One last comment before I publish this puppy....what foreign policy experience does Hillary have that makes her so damned qualified to run the armed forces? She has claimed to have played important roles in Northern Ireland and the Balkans. I suppose it is a media conspiracy that the '90s went by and we never heard a peep about Hillary's foreign policy successes. The Clintonites speak of her service on the armed services committee. Taking votes and mocking Rumsfeld for a few hours has very little to do with leadership. Look at the list of full committee members. Some are more than qualified to be the CiC of the armed forces (i.e., Warner, Webb). Some are not.
Her track record is voting for the war, the most reckless vote of this decade. Bring this up, and she says, well, I wasn't voting for the war, I was voting for giving diplomacy and inspectors a chance. I am not a member of the armed services committee, so I can't possibly compete with her foreign policy creds, but it was pretty clear to me that Bush was intent on war irrespective of diplomacy, inspectors, and everything else. If you are suckered by Bush--the most transparent leader on Earth--how are you going to match up with Putin?
Here's the course map (approximately):
Race-time temperature at 9 AM: 32 degrees and windy. To give you an example of the wind, this is what the wind did last night:
Extenuating circumstances: The first "spring forward" daylight savings morning, so it was extra hard to get up this morning. Thanks to the local coffee shop (not the one seized by the DC tax authorities) for a good 12-oz cup on the way to the Metro.
Post-race report: My left ankle/Achilles is a little sore from not wearing the right sneakers for a few weeks. I hope to continue running for the...
Next race: the April 6th Cherry Blossom 10-miler.
Now I am back home and actually enjoyed Meet the Press this morning. Thank God, no Carville/Matalin garbage-fest.
The topic was the on-going Democratic circular firing squad. I am afraid this nomination fight isn't going to end well for Democrats. Neither one can get a majority of delegates without the superdelegates.
The final result needs to fair in fact and appearance. This Florida and Michigan delegate clusterfuck really need to be sorted out, one way or another. It's hard to see women, blacks, and younger voters coming together behind one candidate in the summer and fall unless both candidates are on the ticket.
I doubt Hillary would accept the VP position given her intimate familiarity with the powerlessness of the position and her age. Is it up to Obama to yield, even if he is leading in elected delegates and/or total votes and the polls?
One last comment before I publish this puppy....what foreign policy experience does Hillary have that makes her so damned qualified to run the armed forces? She has claimed to have played important roles in Northern Ireland and the Balkans. I suppose it is a media conspiracy that the '90s went by and we never heard a peep about Hillary's foreign policy successes. The Clintonites speak of her service on the armed services committee. Taking votes and mocking Rumsfeld for a few hours has very little to do with leadership. Look at the list of full committee members. Some are more than qualified to be the CiC of the armed forces (i.e., Warner, Webb). Some are not.
Her track record is voting for the war, the most reckless vote of this decade. Bring this up, and she says, well, I wasn't voting for the war, I was voting for giving diplomacy and inspectors a chance. I am not a member of the armed services committee, so I can't possibly compete with her foreign policy creds, but it was pretty clear to me that Bush was intent on war irrespective of diplomacy, inspectors, and everything else. If you are suckered by Bush--the most transparent leader on Earth--how are you going to match up with Putin?
Sunday, March 2, 2008
MTP Jumped the Shark
I have heard it said that Tim Russert reinvigorated Meet the Press once upon a time. Tim has been under the gun lately for sexism and/or bias against Hillary Clinton, for being a mouthpiece and easy interviewer for Cheney, and for other sins.
I do think he is selectively tough on certain guests, but that's not my complaint today. Mine is his choice of guests. I hadn't really thought about a political talk show jumping the shark until today. NBC really needs a new host to bore my wife on Sunday mornings.
Today's guests included:
* James Carville, Democrat
* Mary Matalin, Republican
What a second! Aren't they married? But they disagree! How novel! They should do commercials! Where's the sitcom?
Other guests include perennial loser Bob Shrum, Democrat, and another Washington establishment consultant, Mike Murphy.
Four has-been retreads saying nothing that hasn't been said a thousand times all week by the usual cast of purveyors of DC conventional group-think. Nuggets of wisdom so far: 1) Hillary's "crisis at 3 AM" ad stinks; 2) If Hillary doesn't win Texas and Ohio, she's finished; 3) Republicans hope there's chaos in the Democratic nominating process; 4) Mary Matalin is upset George H.W. Bush lost in 1992, thanks to Perot, not her husband's candidate; and 5) There is no 5.
And they get paid for this.
I really should go out for a run. I've got the Cherry Blossom 10-Miler in a month and I haven't been running because of Achilles and calf soreness. Hopefully new insoles will help.
Update: I ran a 5k, but I'm not sold on the insoles. My Achilleses feel good, but the arch support hasn't molded to the shape of my foot yet.
I do think he is selectively tough on certain guests, but that's not my complaint today. Mine is his choice of guests. I hadn't really thought about a political talk show jumping the shark until today. NBC really needs a new host to bore my wife on Sunday mornings.
Today's guests included:
* James Carville, Democrat
* Mary Matalin, Republican
What a second! Aren't they married? But they disagree! How novel! They should do commercials! Where's the sitcom?
Other guests include perennial loser Bob Shrum, Democrat, and another Washington establishment consultant, Mike Murphy.
Four has-been retreads saying nothing that hasn't been said a thousand times all week by the usual cast of purveyors of DC conventional group-think. Nuggets of wisdom so far: 1) Hillary's "crisis at 3 AM" ad stinks; 2) If Hillary doesn't win Texas and Ohio, she's finished; 3) Republicans hope there's chaos in the Democratic nominating process; 4) Mary Matalin is upset George H.W. Bush lost in 1992, thanks to Perot, not her husband's candidate; and 5) There is no 5.
And they get paid for this.
I really should go out for a run. I've got the Cherry Blossom 10-Miler in a month and I haven't been running because of Achilles and calf soreness. Hopefully new insoles will help.
Update: I ran a 5k, but I'm not sold on the insoles. My Achilleses feel good, but the arch support hasn't molded to the shape of my foot yet.
Saturday, March 1, 2008
The U.S. Mint Hearts George III
This week the U.S. Mint rejected within 48 hours the District of Columbia's suggested motto for its commemorative quarter, "Taxation Without Representation." This is DC's unofficial motto and is found on most DC car license plates.
[Congress passed legislation in 2008 to allow DC and US territories to have their quarters like the 50-State Quarter Program that made the Federal government billions of dollars less poor.]
Since DC is not a state, we do not have voting representation in Congress. Nevertheless, we are required to Federal income taxes. This, ostensibly, was the cause of the American Revolution.
Lots has happened in the past two-hundred thirty-two years. "Taxation Without Representation" is now "controversial":
Sounds reasonable, right? We don't want rabble-rousing quarters to negatively affect the dignity of the George Washingon quarter.
Under Federal law, a design cannot be "frivolous or inappropriate." DC's proposal isn't frivolous. I don't know how to interpret "inappropriate," but let's see how the Mint interpreted it.
There is no design criteria on the Mint's website, but since this is an outgrowth of the 50-State Quarter program with the same statutory standard, let's assume that the 50-State design criteria applies:
The design criteria is subject to interpretation. It could that designs should avoid (a) controversial subjects; and (b) symbols likely to offend. Or it could mean, controversial subjects and controversial symbols, either of which are likely to offend. Perhaps a Treasury Department attorney-advisor was consulted on this.
Reasonably or not, some Americans may feel that full DC voting rights is controversial, but I doubt think it is likely to offend. If you are offended by that, you are a crazy cracker.
In any event, whether legal or not, the Mint will have its way. The Washington Post reports that the District may seek to use its official motto--Justitia Omnibus (Justice for All). Fuck that!
How could you go from the truth that there is taxation without representation to the lie that there is justice for all?
I have a better idea. Submit no motto. A motto is not a design criteria. Just plaster the "controversial Negro" (as Public Enemy would say) Frederick Douglass on the back of the quarter and call it a day. He can be George Washington's new black friend!
This issue relates to another pet peeve of mine. There has never been a USS District of Columbia in the US Navy.
Washingtonians have served in the Navy since its inception and the Washington Navy Yard has been the center of US navy shipbuilding and the largest naval ordnance plant in the world.
If you review a list of USS navy ships, you can tell that the USS DC hasn't not been commissioned because the name may be a bit clunky. Past navy ships include the USS Van Valkenburgh, the USS Chase S. Osburn (scared the crap out of the Germans!), and the USS Cheboygan County (a frickin' county!).
It is a slight, most likely because the majority of its residents have traditionally been black. That is also why there is Taxation Without Representation.
[Congress passed legislation in 2008 to allow DC and US territories to have their quarters like the 50-State Quarter Program that made the Federal government billions of dollars less poor.]
Since DC is not a state, we do not have voting representation in Congress. Nevertheless, we are required to Federal income taxes. This, ostensibly, was the cause of the American Revolution.
Lots has happened in the past two-hundred thirty-two years. "Taxation Without Representation" is now "controversial":
"Changing how the District of Columbia . . . is represented in Congress is a contemporary political issue on which there presently is no national consensus and over which reasonable minds differ," the Mint said in a statement.
Sounds reasonable, right? We don't want rabble-rousing quarters to negatively affect the dignity of the George Washingon quarter.
Under Federal law, a design cannot be "frivolous or inappropriate." DC's proposal isn't frivolous. I don't know how to interpret "inappropriate," but let's see how the Mint interpreted it.
There is no design criteria on the Mint's website, but since this is an outgrowth of the 50-State Quarter program with the same statutory standard, let's assume that the 50-State design criteria applies:
Designs shall have broad appeal to the citizens of the state and avoid controversial subjects or symbols that are likely to offend.
...
State flags and state seals are not considered suitable for designs. (Ed: Take that, South Carolina!)
...
Inappropriate design concepts include, but are not limited to logos or depictions of specific commercial, private, educational, civic, religious, sports, or other organizations whose membership or ownership is not universal.
The design criteria is subject to interpretation. It could that designs should avoid (a) controversial subjects; and (b) symbols likely to offend. Or it could mean, controversial subjects and controversial symbols, either of which are likely to offend. Perhaps a Treasury Department attorney-advisor was consulted on this.
Reasonably or not, some Americans may feel that full DC voting rights is controversial, but I doubt think it is likely to offend. If you are offended by that, you are a crazy cracker.
In any event, whether legal or not, the Mint will have its way. The Washington Post reports that the District may seek to use its official motto--Justitia Omnibus (Justice for All). Fuck that!
How could you go from the truth that there is taxation without representation to the lie that there is justice for all?
I have a better idea. Submit no motto. A motto is not a design criteria. Just plaster the "controversial Negro" (as Public Enemy would say) Frederick Douglass on the back of the quarter and call it a day. He can be George Washington's new black friend!
This issue relates to another pet peeve of mine. There has never been a USS District of Columbia in the US Navy.
Washingtonians have served in the Navy since its inception and the Washington Navy Yard has been the center of US navy shipbuilding and the largest naval ordnance plant in the world.
If you review a list of USS navy ships, you can tell that the USS DC hasn't not been commissioned because the name may be a bit clunky. Past navy ships include the USS Van Valkenburgh, the USS Chase S. Osburn (scared the crap out of the Germans!), and the USS Cheboygan County (a frickin' county!).
It is a slight, most likely because the majority of its residents have traditionally been black. That is also why there is Taxation Without Representation.
Monday, February 18, 2008
Jew Bag
One recent rainy day, I didn't have enough time to have coffee before entering my office building. Before my morning coffee, I am a zombie-like non-responsive delusional cranky bastard. I barely acknowledge my dear wife before I have my morning coffee, which may be a reason why she'll usually make coffee in the morning before I get out of bed.
Anyhow, on this rainy morning, I walked into my office building and was noticed a peculiar sight:
Yes, I thought my Federal office building was calling out "jew," which immediately got my attention. This couldn't be right, could it? Upon closer examination, I took another view from the other side. Here's the frontal view:
That made more sense.
Anyhow, on this rainy morning, I walked into my office building and was noticed a peculiar sight:
Yes, I thought my Federal office building was calling out "jew," which immediately got my attention. This couldn't be right, could it? Upon closer examination, I took another view from the other side. Here's the frontal view:
That made more sense.
Sunday, February 17, 2008
CNN's Ballot Bowl Sucks
I've had CNN's "Ballot Bowl" show on all afternoon. So much time, so little insight. I've learned nothing. My wife has fled the room.
Here's a sample.
4:46 PM. Hillary Clinton says she's been creating jobs for years in upstate New York. How many district offices does she have? (Answer, 9 total, 5 of which I could would consider upstate. Thanks, Hillary, for your job creation for upstate New York.)
4:48 PM. Barack Obama says Hillary Clinton voted for the war, like John McCain.
4:50 PM. Commercial break.
Ye Gods!
Here's a sample.
4:46 PM. Hillary Clinton says she's been creating jobs for years in upstate New York. How many district offices does she have? (Answer, 9 total, 5 of which I could would consider upstate. Thanks, Hillary, for your job creation for upstate New York.)
4:48 PM. Barack Obama says Hillary Clinton voted for the war, like John McCain.
4:50 PM. Commercial break.
Ye Gods!
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
The Liberal Justice System
Last summer, I got a ticket for parking on my street during street sweeping hours. It wasn't totally my fault; my car just wouldn't start. Since I felt like circumstances were somewhat beyond my control, I admitted the violation "with explanation." At best, I hoped the penalty would be reduced. Well, 5 months later, I got the above letter from the DMV. In case you can't read it, it says in pertinent part:
A hearing examiner considered your written explanation and evidence and applicable District of Columbia traffic law and dimissed the ticket described below.... We have cleared your record of liability for this infraction.
I admitted the violation, yet I was absolved of all liability! God bless the liberal justice system!
Sunday, February 10, 2008
A closer look at the NRCC scandal
I'm not talking about a run of the mill sex scandal. Or a run of the mill sex scandal. Or even a run of the mill sex scandal. I'm talking about allegations of fraud at the National Republican Campaign Committee (NRCC).
The blogosphere has circulated a story broken by The Politico that the NRCC is under FBI investigation. While it's always fun when the opposing party is under investigaiton, this could really be a long-term problem for the NRCC.
On February 6th, The Politico reported that the NRCC was under FBI investigation. On February 8th, Politico reported that NRCC's former treasurer Christopher J. Ward forged an internal audit and the NRCC notified the Federal Election Commission (FEC) that the committee may have filed inaccurate disclosure statements. These developments have not made the NRCC "In the News" website section. They also haven't made the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee's "Newsroom" either. A tacit understanding?
Republican officials are concerned that illegal activity may have gone back as far as 2001.
What could this be about? I know that accounting procedures don't sound that interesting on their face.
Why would the NRCC have illegal or fraudulent accounting procedures? Not that I have any inside knowledge, but given the NRCC's role, the shady accounting could have been designed to cover up campaign finance law violations. For instance, the NRCC may have violated election contribution limits by collecting more money that is allowed from individuals or giving more than is allowed to particular campaigns. It is also possible, given the millions of dollars passing through it, that the NRCC used money as a slush fund for the private gain of insiders or other purposes.
I am by no means a tax or political law expert, but I could easily envision possible violations of Federal tax laws. As a "Section 527" political committee, the NRCC has to file IRS Form 1120-POL as its tax return. Line 7 of 1120-POL requires the NRCC to disclose "income and nonexempt function expenditures." This includes illegal expeditures as well as funds that were meant for political functions but went to other purposes.
Basically, political committees like the NRCC do not have to pay taxes on donations (called "exempt function income") because the government does not want to tax political donations, which are akin to speech under the First Amendment. However, income derived from other sources is taxable income. In addition, exempt function income that is diverted for other purposes is also taxable. According to the IRS, illegal expenditures are also taxable.
A political committee's bookkeeper would be in charge of preventing the commingling of exempt function income and other income. If Christopher Ward used NRCC donations for non-exempt purposes, that amount would be considered income. If Christopher Ward willfully covered up such shenanigans to the IRS, it would be tax fraud. If others were involved, it would a conspiracy.
Regardless of the criminal implications, the NRCC could be looking at a large tax liabilities including interest and penalties. Not to mention expected massive legal bills from Covington & Burling. In contrast to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, the NRCC barely has any cash now. It's hard to imagine that the dispirited Republican faithful will be eager to pay legal bills and tax penalties.
I hope the nice NRCC building at 320 C St. SE, located just steps from the House of Representatives office buildings, goes on sale to keep the NRCC solvent. It would make nice condos.
The blogosphere has circulated a story broken by The Politico that the NRCC is under FBI investigation. While it's always fun when the opposing party is under investigaiton, this could really be a long-term problem for the NRCC.
On February 6th, The Politico reported that the NRCC was under FBI investigation. On February 8th, Politico reported that NRCC's former treasurer Christopher J. Ward forged an internal audit and the NRCC notified the Federal Election Commission (FEC) that the committee may have filed inaccurate disclosure statements. These developments have not made the NRCC "In the News" website section. They also haven't made the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee's "Newsroom" either. A tacit understanding?
Republican officials are concerned that illegal activity may have gone back as far as 2001.
What could this be about? I know that accounting procedures don't sound that interesting on their face.
Why would the NRCC have illegal or fraudulent accounting procedures? Not that I have any inside knowledge, but given the NRCC's role, the shady accounting could have been designed to cover up campaign finance law violations. For instance, the NRCC may have violated election contribution limits by collecting more money that is allowed from individuals or giving more than is allowed to particular campaigns. It is also possible, given the millions of dollars passing through it, that the NRCC used money as a slush fund for the private gain of insiders or other purposes.
I am by no means a tax or political law expert, but I could easily envision possible violations of Federal tax laws. As a "Section 527" political committee, the NRCC has to file IRS Form 1120-POL as its tax return. Line 7 of 1120-POL requires the NRCC to disclose "income and nonexempt function expenditures." This includes illegal expeditures as well as funds that were meant for political functions but went to other purposes.
Basically, political committees like the NRCC do not have to pay taxes on donations (called "exempt function income") because the government does not want to tax political donations, which are akin to speech under the First Amendment. However, income derived from other sources is taxable income. In addition, exempt function income that is diverted for other purposes is also taxable. According to the IRS, illegal expenditures are also taxable.
A political committee's bookkeeper would be in charge of preventing the commingling of exempt function income and other income. If Christopher Ward used NRCC donations for non-exempt purposes, that amount would be considered income. If Christopher Ward willfully covered up such shenanigans to the IRS, it would be tax fraud. If others were involved, it would a conspiracy.
Regardless of the criminal implications, the NRCC could be looking at a large tax liabilities including interest and penalties. Not to mention expected massive legal bills from Covington & Burling. In contrast to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, the NRCC barely has any cash now. It's hard to imagine that the dispirited Republican faithful will be eager to pay legal bills and tax penalties.
I hope the nice NRCC building at 320 C St. SE, located just steps from the House of Representatives office buildings, goes on sale to keep the NRCC solvent. It would make nice condos.
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
Best ribbon ever
Seen at 3rd St. SE and Virginia Ave. at approximately 12:45 PM on February 6, 2008. Is this McCain's new slogan?
In other news, there is only one remaining U.S. veteran of World War I. As many of you know, I have an annual "Armistice Day" party to commemorate the end of that war. When I was a kid, I loved watching WWI documentaries on TV. I loved the primitive tanks, the primitive planes, the strange scenes of men on horseback going up against machine guns. When I got older, I more clearly understood the sheer pointlessness of WWI. Seriously, did anyone win the Great War? There were certainly losers--Germany, Austria-Hungary, the Ottoman Empire, Czarist Russia--but who really won? With unfortunate results, perhaps the only real winner was Japan. Frank Buckles, 107, of Charles Town, West Virginia, you are the last remaining World War I veteran. You have a standing invitation to the 80th Annual Armistice Day Party on November 11, 2008.
Monday, February 4, 2008
Irrational Faith
This is my first post. Obviously, I hope my blog doesn't suck.
The big news is that the Giants won the Super Bowl. A fan always hopes for a good season, but before the season I certainly wouldn't have put money on the Giants to even get to the Super Bowl.
In the New York sports venacular, the word "believe" is typically associated with the Mets, specifically the 1969 Mets. These days, that overblown word will be spotted on banners in May at Shea and even at other stadia. But this Giants team really was about belief.
My belief was not unwavering. On December 24, 2007, I declared in an e-mail to friends:
"The frustrating thing is I don't doubt Eli's ability to win some games, but the Giants are not going to win the Super Bowl with such an inconsistent QB. He hasn't had a complete, 4-quarter effective game in a long time. So, sure, he'll get to the playoffs with a strong defense and good running game, but his play does not indicate that he will lead his team to a championship."
I can claim that I believed, because I put money on the game. I bet $10 on the Giants to win and $10 against the spread. (Shoulda put $100 on the line. I also should have bought real estate in Washington in 1998, but never mind.) My confidence was on display only after the Giants had made it into the game.
But the truth is that somewhere during the season, I stopped believing that the Giants could win it all. Does that make me a bad fan? Don't fans put too much emphasis on what they do? Some wear lucky jerseys. Some pray. Others say cliches like "one game at a time" as if it matters what we think.
I was skeptical. I needed evidence to believe that the Giants could win a championship with Eli Manning at the helm. Like religion, being a sports fan should be an irrational matter of faith. Following your team is not about evidence, it is about faith, irrational faith, rife with superstition and ritual. I will never lose sight of this again. As Theodore Herzl famously declared, if you will it, it is no dream.*
* Does not apply to Redskins. The irrational faith of the drunken ignorant Maryland masses in the 400-level will never be redeemed.
The big news is that the Giants won the Super Bowl. A fan always hopes for a good season, but before the season I certainly wouldn't have put money on the Giants to even get to the Super Bowl.
In the New York sports venacular, the word "believe" is typically associated with the Mets, specifically the 1969 Mets. These days, that overblown word will be spotted on banners in May at Shea and even at other stadia. But this Giants team really was about belief.
My belief was not unwavering. On December 24, 2007, I declared in an e-mail to friends:
"The frustrating thing is I don't doubt Eli's ability to win some games, but the Giants are not going to win the Super Bowl with such an inconsistent QB. He hasn't had a complete, 4-quarter effective game in a long time. So, sure, he'll get to the playoffs with a strong defense and good running game, but his play does not indicate that he will lead his team to a championship."
I can claim that I believed, because I put money on the game. I bet $10 on the Giants to win and $10 against the spread. (Shoulda put $100 on the line. I also should have bought real estate in Washington in 1998, but never mind.) My confidence was on display only after the Giants had made it into the game.
But the truth is that somewhere during the season, I stopped believing that the Giants could win it all. Does that make me a bad fan? Don't fans put too much emphasis on what they do? Some wear lucky jerseys. Some pray. Others say cliches like "one game at a time" as if it matters what we think.
I was skeptical. I needed evidence to believe that the Giants could win a championship with Eli Manning at the helm. Like religion, being a sports fan should be an irrational matter of faith. Following your team is not about evidence, it is about faith, irrational faith, rife with superstition and ritual. I will never lose sight of this again. As Theodore Herzl famously declared, if you will it, it is no dream.*
* Does not apply to Redskins. The irrational faith of the drunken ignorant Maryland masses in the 400-level will never be redeemed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)