Veggie Potluck

A brand new year!

2009-01-01T17:53:00.004-05:00

And stuff!

We're back. Again. With a vengeance. More vengeance than usual. The long-lasting kind.

Okay, first, courtesy of Oliver Willis, check this heroic story.

Second, our dream come true:

Finally, I'm going to put 2000 miles on my bike(s) this year and read 50 books. Eat it.

Onward and Upward

2008-12-27T15:00:00.003-05:00

In honor of the new Bush-free era and the renaissance of VP3, I give you two inspiring anthems starring Dave Grohl of Nirvana/Foo Fighters.

Tiny Dancer

Leather and Lace

Black and non-black

2008-11-11T13:14:00.003-05:00

I've been saying for a while that this expanded re-definition of white is Latinos' likely future. We've seen this white assimilation in the past with Irish, Italians, and Jews. Now Latinos and Asians may well be subsumed into our cultural definition of white. The glaring exception of this white assimilation is, of course, African-Americans. The systemic racial categories remain black and non-black, basically.

I guess our hope can be with more and more "mutts" like Obama and me, the categories become more and more fluid, less easily defined. I'm not necessarily optimistic, but then again, I wasn't optimistic five years ago that we'd see a black President anytime soon.

I Read

2008-11-09T16:09:00.005-05:00

So in addition to starting up blogging again, I'm also reading. And by "reading," I'm referring to articles, not books--I have to wean myself back into it. That weaning process made me start with a political read, as I'm already going through campaign withdrawals. I spent many, many minutes reading Newsweek's laborious behind-the-scenes seven-part series on the 2008 campaign. If that description sounds interesting, you'll like it. If it doesn't, don't bother.

The next article should be read by each of you. Since I'm undercultured, I've never really read David Foster Wallace. At some point I'll get to his fiction, but I highly recommend reading his account of a luxury cruise excursion that he penned for Harper's. It at first solidified my determination to never go on such a cruise but then made me second-guess because it could all be worth it just for the sheer experience of the thing but then I reconsidered because actually living it would most likely pale in comparison to Wallace's utterly brilliant take. So, yeah, it's worth a read.

Change

2008-11-09T14:28:00.003-05:00

I am so very glad that we won.

On Lance (no last name needed)

2008-11-09T14:24:00.003-05:00

Still don't know what to think about Lance's comeback, but I'm sure it will be entertaining. For one good example, it brings borderline psychopaths like Simeoni out and then fun articles are written about their "rivalry."

Don't Cry for Stewart & Colbert

2008-11-09T14:16:00.003-05:00

There's been some chatter about the dark and stormy future of Comedy Central's nightly political two-fer. Count me among those predicting The Daily Show and The Colbert Report will be just fine. The genius of the shows is that they are not dependent on one person or one administration for their content--there's stupidity and incompetence all around us. And, of course, one of the primary targets is the media, whose idiocy is not going away.

Linky Linky

2007-03-03T10:57:00.000-05:00

Well, since my last post generated so much discussion, I thought I'd switch it up a bit and get back to my old ways of posting: More links! Less substance!

This copyeditor-related podcast is humorous in a slightly scary way (although it could be a fake, so fair warning).

So there's this nut Duncan Hunter (R-Ca.) who's running for President. (Funny already, right?) I saw one of his ads here in Iowa and the gist of it was he was going to hunt down dem Mexicans himself. Or something. Anyway, he's got this PAC called "Peace Through Strength," which I was going to mock for being Orwellian, but apparently that phrase is unironically attributed to He Whose Name Must Not Be Mentioned But Is Unfathomably Worshiped. So, not much to say there. The rest of the GOP pres-wannabes are lining up to showcase their authoritarian bona fides, John McCain by putting up a fascist chic website and Rudy Giuliani by, well, being himself.

At least a few people are standing up to He Whose Name Must Not Blah Blah Blah.

To understand the future we must look to the past.

Al Franken is framing his Senate race pretty well up north.

Check out this site for some moving photojournalism. (Note the 1st place Portrait photo.)

Count me all-in for this movement. Please, nytimes.com, please. Do it for the kids.

This seems somehow wrong.

It is a moral outrage that we still don't have universal health coverage in this country. I mean, politics is all well and good and interesting for some of us, but the policy implications of right-wingers when it comes to health care are insanely destructive to millions of people. Seriously, if I believed in hell, I'd want them to go rot in it (...uh, the right-wingers, not the people without health care).

Speaking of, like, right-wingers and hell and such, here's a Lenten-themed quote to ponder.

Bad news here. I wonder what counts as "addiction"....

Courtesy of my favorite blogger (a lefty-peacey progressive who is a fan of indie music and the NBA), we have some breaking news: the Bush administration's diplomacy sucks.

OK. That felt good. More later.

It's Sabbath.* Let's get Adventisty.

2007-02-24T17:08:00.000-05:00

Well, it's good to see that some former contributors are currently contributing to the internets, though sharing their wisdom elsewhere. Or maybe just engaging in shameless self-promotion.

Anyway, I was reading this article over at Spectrum's site and I thought I'd throw out a discussion topic for our reader (yes, singular). James Coffin cited a pretty fascinating interview with Des Ford's son Luke that I had actually already read. The part he globbed onto was Ford's comment about the necessity of believing your religion/denomination is "chosen" or "special" if it is to continue on. Coffin took this and wrote about some possibly meaningful distinctions between "liberals" and "conservatives" in the Adventist church and the implications for our kids' futures. Or something.

I've spent seconds--maybe full minutes--thinking over this a bit myself, though from a slightly different perspective. There are a lot of things from my strong Adventist upbringing that I appreciate and honor and am thankful I experienced (camp meetings, vespers, Sabbath school, potlucks...). There are quite a few other things that I really don't plan on exposing my kids to (scary stories about the time of trouble, anti-Catholic bigotry, inbred schooling...). But I don't know that how easy it is to pass on the good parts of Adventist (or Christian) culture and avoid the unwanted others. I mean, if my kids don't go to Adventist schools (and I doubt they will), how culturally Adventist could they get? I feel like there is a certain amount of certainty/fundamentalism/whatever needed to inculcate the values/culture that I want and I don't know that my freewheeling liberal attitudes provide a context where an appropriate appreciation for Christianity--especially of the cultural/collective sort--can prosper. Not that this is super pressing since I'm not dealing with parental concerns yet and don't plan to be anytime soon (ahem, Wheat Thin). Anyway, this is my first real post back in the saddle, so it doesn't have to have a point, just an invitation for other(s?) to comment.

*It was Sabbath when I started this post. So there. Not to say that it took me this long to come up with a few blathering sentences, but I get distracted easily....

Packed my bag last night, preflight...

2007-02-08T12:02:00.000-05:00

Phew, that was close.

N-Dawgg remains without internet due to the massive failure of his hypercoil super accelerator. In the meantime, I would like to keep all of our readers content with some words from the Immortal William Shatner:

Is this thing on?

2007-01-25T21:54:00.000-05:00

Yes, the rumors are true. We is back.

And we've got technology.

Best SOTU Response:

Best Republican of the Moment:

Oooo, don't it feel good?

The Rebirth of Cool

2007-01-25T16:19:00.000-05:00

Veggie Potluck will rise again. Coming soon...

R.I.P. - Veggie Potluck

2006-04-12T22:15:00.000-04:00

July 30, 2003 to December 14, 2005
Devoted Friend
Constant Teacher
Loved to Argue
Killed by Baseball

Gone, but not Forgotten

F#&%&#*$=

2005-12-14T22:14:00.000-05:00

I realize that nobody will believe me when I say this (I barely believe myself), but I had penned a decently well-formed riposte to wheat thin's love letter to baseball yesterday when Firefox locked up on me (which it has been doing with some regularity since I downloaded 1.5). So, no dice on that--I've exerted all my energy and now all I can share are these three sweet little gems from Timothy McSweeney's Internet Tendencies:

Movies That Won't Be Shown on the Lifetime Network
&
Things Not Overheard at a Conceptual-Art Gallery Opening
&
State Songs If They All Suggested the Apathy of Idaho's "Here We Have Idaho."

(More enjoyable lists here.)

Boy, I know people have been waiting for THIS:

2005-11-20T23:09:00.000-05:00

A book update! Yay!

At this point it seems, um, unlikely that I will finish 50 books by the end of the year. Still possible, of course, but a successful scenario would have me either quitting my job or starting to count kids' books.

Still, I feel I have somewhat of an obligation to share my progress over the past three months. In short: not good. I've run a low-quantity, high-quality operation.

Book #6 was Bill Bryson's The Lost Continent. Bryson is a travel writer of sorts and is quite humorous. This book is about driving through small town America after he had lived overseas for a while. I managed not to be offended by his repeated libelous remarks about the fine city of Des Moines (where he was born) and enjoyed the quick read, especially since me and A-Dawgg were in the midst of a lengthy road trip ourselves.

Next (book 7) I finished The Brethren by Scott Armstrong and the man some call Booby. This was an interesting one to read during these times we live in, what with the Roberts nomination and now Alito and Woodward being completely coopted by the Washington establishment and people he's supposed to be, you know, journalising. This book was a bit weird because the clerks played huge roles in all the decisionmaking and politicking around the Court, but the authors almost never gave any of their names. It was nice to get a "behind the scenes" look, though Closed Chambers was probably more enjoyable. I'd say this one fits in somewhere between All the President's Men and the hacktacular Bush at War.

Eight (8). City: Urbanism and Its End by Douglas W. Rae. I would not describe this book as a quick read. It's more of a textbook, but I loved it. As the subtitle subtly hints, it covers the rise and fall of urbanism. The case study was New Haven, so there were lots of interesting facts about that sweet little city's history. Rae includes all sorts of very detailed data and studies that show how New Haven grew to be where it is today and how it's changed and such. This is truly a phenomenal book. If you have an interest in Land Use or City Planning or Urban Growth or New Haven, I highly recommend it. If you don't have one of those interests, you may nod off a bit.

After that I read Freakonomics by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner (#9). Perhaps the economists among us could comment more thoughtfully, but I thoroughly enjoyed this book. I had run across some of the Levitt's weird, at times controversial research findings before, but it was good to fly through a whole bunch of them at once. Tip: This book is also useful for choosing baby names and selling houses. For more, read the blog.

Big Book Number Ten (10): Bringing Down the House by Ben Mezrich. Now, I consider myself a discriminating film watcher. Not of the really good old movies or the artsy-fartsy French ones from the 60s, but when it comes to evaluating the ones that have come out in the past decade-plus, I hold myself in high esteem. Some people have a weakness for action movies or romantic comedies. Not I. However, I do have two blind spots where appreciation of quality comes in second place to pure enjoyment: 1) comedies of the Dumb & Dumber variety and 2) con (not convict) movies. Apparently, I also like con books. Really, the story in this book isn't a true con, but it has many of the same elements and rockin' hijinks. It was a fun, fast read and I can't wait until they turn it into a movie. Rah rah.

What number am I on now (why haven't you stopped reading yet)? Eleven (11). This is a good one to ignore. Good in Bed. Yes, author Weiner also wrote In Her Shoes, which is now a movie. That I just saw last week. I'm just gonna say that neither of them were as bad as they look. And...well, let's leave it at that.

I finally finished A Confederacy of Dunces by John Kennedy Toole (12), which I had been reading for months. It's one of those books you have to be in the mood to read. Sure, it won a Pulitzer and it has one of the hugest, most absurd characters ever and some delightfully inspired dialogue, but I had a hard time getting really engaged with the characters for some reason. I'll sum it up like this: it's an excellent but frustrating novel. And it was set in New Orleans, yo.

Yesterday I wrapped up Stephen G. Bloom's Postville (13), which I liked (I tend to pre-screen my books pretty well...usually...disregard #11). Bloom is a big-city journalist who moved to Iowa City and learned about this Orthodox Jewish community who bought a kosher meatpacking plant in Postville, Iowa. As the subtitle states, it was quite a culture clash! As you can imagine! Heh! Anyway, Bloom injects himself in the "reporting" a lot, which some readers might not like. I, however, did enjoy the parts with him dealing with reconciling his urban sensibilities and new rural life. Good times. Interesting story. Whee.

Baseball is a slow burn

2005-11-08T14:25:00.000-05:00

[Continued from comments on previous post] As for the baseball/basketball argument, I agree that basketball is more fluid and athletic (although you don’t think playing 150 games at catcher requires some serious endurance?). Whether that corresponds to basketball being a better sport is another question. Certainly it is silly just to name two sports which emphasize different skills sets and appeal to different types of viewers, and try to decide which is "better." This is clearly a matter of preference.

However, I think the appeal of both sports can be communicated. Not to take anything away from the frenetic pace and short-attention span appeal of basketball, which can of course be glorious, baseball is a sport that requires patience and diligence to reap its many benefits.

I like two things primarily about baseball (not including the incredible nostalgia involved in things like the voice of Vin Scully). The first thing I learned to love about baseball was the numbers. When you follow entire games on a scorecard, you quickly grasp how everything can be quantified. Yes, there are numbers in every sport, but in baseball every position on the field has a number, every play can be reduced to numbers, and every interaction between ball and bat has a statistic. Every year that goes by some nerd comes up with a new number that is supposed to be the end-all for judging performance. I like the accumulation of statistics over the entire season (and equally, over entire careers)- home run races, batting averages, strikeouts – much more than I like the individual games (at least until the playoffs).

And there is no doubt that individual, regular season baseball games are less important than basketball games. This is inevitable when the teams play twice as many games over a half-year. Each game is much less important than the slow accumulation of wins over a season. But this is another reason that baseball is glorious. In baseball failure is emphasized (and normalized) over individual achievement. The human element in victory is diminished. A good hitter gets retired 7 out of 10 times; a three-run lead is generally very difficult to overcome; you can only use your best pitcher 1 out of every 5 games; weather can cancel your game at most ballparks; a batter hits the same pitch with the same force two times and it’s a home run in one stadium and a fly-out in another; a great team can win 85% of basketball games – no more than 65% for a great baseball team.

The reason this appeals to me is twofold – to a pessimist, baseball looks a lot more like life; and when individual achievement does occur, it is spectacular and unusual (how many planets had to align for Albert Pujols to hit his game winning three-run homer in the NLCS this year? – how much more often does Kobe have an opportunity to win a game with a jumper?)

Also, although money always has the potential to ruin baseball (see: NY Yankees), this season proved that the highest payroll can’t guarantee victory every year. And a baseball game is still affordable for a family of five.

But again, these are all matters of preference. The things I like about baseball are subtle. A baseball game is like a Hitchcock movie, and a basketball game is like a Wes Craven flick. Of course Wes will make you scream louder at first, but sometimes the Hitchcock will keep you up at night.

I gotta get this off my chest

2005-11-07T23:47:00.000-05:00

1. Baseball sucks.

2. Basketball rules.

Word.

Let's get this party re-re-started...

2005-11-05T11:26:00.000-05:00

Right?

Sure this post is discouragingly short, but it's what I like to call "a start." Comment away (especially you spammers).

Paul Krugman (usually sequestered behind the expensive TimesSelect wall) has a great column here. Note especially Howard Dean's role in the parable. Who wouldn't want a President Dean now?

#5

2005-08-09T14:35:00.000-04:00

I finally finished my fifth book, which should count for, like, four whole books since it's well over 1000 pages: Master of the Senate by Robert Caro. It is the third book in a four-book series covering the life of Lyndon Johnson. I haven't read the first two (which were published many years ago), but I thought I'd start with this one since it won the National Book Award and a Pulitzer.

Focusing on LBJ's twelve years in the Senate, it is a truly phenomenal book. Political biographies can tend toward the dull side, but Caro makes it read like a novel. He spends many detailed pages--even full chapters--explaining and describing the history of the Senate and the life stories of important, relevant people like Richard Russell and Sam Rayburn and Emmett Till and Leland Olds. Caro also does a nice job by refraining from lionizing Johnson too much. I mean, you do get the feeling that Johnson is the greatest political genius--at least in the Senate--of this century, but you also realize he was a bigoted, misogyistic, bullying, self-centered asshole. As far as I could tell, he had pretty much no "principled" stands on anything and played everything toward his own ambition and power. That said, he accomplished some things pretty effectively even against the strong Southern racist bloc, including the 1957 Civil Rights Act, which laid the groundwork for later, better Acts. I wouldn't necessarily recommend this book too broadly, but political junkies should devour it.

Books 2, 3, 4

2005-08-07T11:28:00.000-04:00

The second book I read was Blue Like Jazz by Donald Miller. Its subtitle is "Nonreligious Thoughts on Christian Spirituality." Miller is a great storyteller, and his stories--mostly autobiographical--are the strongest parts of the book. He thinks of himself as a deep thinker of sorts, but his "philosophizing" got annoying and wordy. Frankly, I don't think it resonated with me as much because I don't have an inherent aversion to all things "religious" like he does and I also don't share his infatuation with "spiritualism" (meant not in an occultish sense but a personally emotional-feely sense). Good writer, quick read.

Book numero tres was Kent Haruf's Plainsong, which was a National Book Award finalist. This was an outstanding book; it should have won that award. The book is set in a small town in the heartland and it reads like a wonderfully-crafted short story. Descriptions and characters are familiar but fresh and the plot meanders satisfyingly. In short, a fantastic novel. Read it.

My fourth book was Middlesex by Jeffrey Eugenides. Again, I highly recommend this book. It is a true epic, following three generations of a Greek family down to the narrator, a middle-aged hermaphrodite. It took me a while to get going in this book, but then I was engrossed. I felt like I had to get to know the book itself, not just the narrator. The book's tone danced and shifted, which I actually enjoyed. The story, as I mentioned, is epic. It's like a huge trilogy creatively intertwined with the immensely personal challenges of the narrator. There were a lot of "new eyes" moments. An excellent work.

"Fit-ty" book challenge

2005-08-06T10:14:00.000-04:00

I'm going to rise above the mean comments of other posters and concentrate on positively and proactively resurrecting this blog. Don't be a hater, etc.

This first post back in the saddle is dedicated to myself. No longer chained to required reading assignments of Barth, Rahner, Ackerman, and Amar, I have begun to read for pleasure once again. In fact, I'm jumping on the somewhat-famous-in-the-blogosphere 50-book challenge and aiming to read 50 books by the end of the year. For some people (read: Silivren), the more appropriate time period would probaby be a week or perhaps a day, but since I remember reading only one book for fun during the entire spring semester, I thought the multi-month strategy would be best.

However, I'm certainly going to count that one book toward my total: Hunter S. Thompson's Fear and Loathing: On the Campaign Trail '72. In short, it is the best political book I've ever read. I had read some of (recently-deceased) Thompson's articles in Rolling Stone and on ESPN.com, but never one of his books. His "gonzo journalism" bowled me over; it fit perfectly with the absurdity of campaigning. The book is a fast, breathless read and I heartily recommend it. Of course, I doubt I would have enjoyed it as much if I didn't agree with him (politically) as much as I do. Evisceration of war-mongerers and weak-spirited establishment Dems is fun for the whole family.

Seven Purple Dixie Cup Recipes

2005-07-27T09:28:00.000-04:00

Tomorrow we celebrate the 14th straight week since the site founder's last post. Congratulations, N-Dawgg!!

In a follow-up to my last post, Steven Johnson, author of Everything Bad is Good for You, has written an open letter to Sen. Clinton re: the Grand Theft Auto investigation. The best part is this:

I'm writing to commend you for calling for a $90-million study on the effects of video games on children, and in particular the courageous stand you have taken in recent weeks against the notorious "Grand Theft Auto" series.

I'd like to draw your attention to another game whose nonstop violence and hostility has captured the attention of millions of kids — a game that instills aggressive thoughts in the minds of its players, some of whom have gone on to commit real-world acts of violence and sexual assault after playing.

I'm talking, of course, about high school football.

Perhaps a little unfair, but still amusing.

Also, I thought it was interesting that the White House is withholding Roberts' tax returns. But Garrison Keilor isn't worried. I am curious to know what all of our reader thinks...

What's On Syrian Edition

2005-07-24T14:08:00.000-04:00

So the reason I'm living in a basement in Sha'laan, one of the fanciest areas in Damascus, is that housing prices have risen 25-60% since last year due to Iraqi immigrants. I am paying only 12000 Syrian pounds (lira) for six weeks, so it sounds like I have a pretty good deal compared to what's on offer. The basement does have the occasional cockroach visitor, but I'm learning to love 'em. Well, tolerate at a broom end perhaps. I came back from Lebanon last Sunday (July 17) and saw nothing of the cross-border clashes. I did, however, see a 7-10 km line of trucks at the border. We thought it was perhaps just Syrian slowness in processing since what goes in must come out, and there was no such line waiting to enter Lebanon. progress sounds plausible.

That Friday we saw the Hezbollah memorial to the resistance fighters/suicide bombers in Ba'albek--sadly, only the outside as it was closed for Friday prayers. Apparently people expect Hezbollah to disarm. I don't think I would if I were them, since I had to listen to Lebanese Christians saying things like, "We just can't live together with Muslims because they don't shower as often as we do," or "Of course I haven't been to Damascus! Why would you go there?" (I don't know--because it's 80 km away and they've dominated your country for 25 years and it's a beautiful and historic city?) I might hesitate to go to Lebanon if I were Syrian, however, if the reports of

Revolution, and Grand Theft Virginity

2005-07-14T10:42:00.000-04:00

Happy Bastille Day, all. As Marxist historian Eric Hobsbawm says of the French Revolution:

The French Revolution may not have been an isolated phenomenon, but it was far more fundamental than any of the other contemporary ones and its consequences were therefore far more profound. In the first place, it occurred in the most powerful and populous state of Europe (leaving Russia apart). In 1789 something like one European out of every five was a Frenchman. In the second place it was, alone of all the revolutions which preceded and followed it, a mass social revolution, and immeasurably more radical than any contemporary upheaval. It is no accident that the American revolutionaries, and the British 'Jacobins' who migrated to France because of their political sympathies, found themselves moderates in France. Tom Paine was an extremist in Britain and America; but in Paris he was among the most moderate of the Girondins. The results of the American revolutions were, broadly speaking, countries carrying on much as before, only minus the political control of the British, Spaniards and Portuguese. The result of the French Revolution was that the age of Balzac replaced the age of Mme. Dubarry.

In the third place, alone of all the contemporary revolutions, the French was ecumenical. Its armies set out to revolutionize the world; its ideas actually did so. The American revolution has remained a crucial event in American history, but (except for the countries directly involved in and by it) it has left few major traces elsewhere. The French Revolution is a landmark in all countries. Its repercussions rather than those of the American revolution, occasioned the risings which led to the liberation of Latin America after 1808. Its direct influence radiated as far as Bengal where Ram Mohan Roy was inspired by it to found the first Hindu reform movement and the ancestor of modern Indian nationalism...It was, as has been well said, 'the first great movement of ideas in Western Christendom that had any real effect on the world of Islam', and that almost immediately...

The French Revolution thus remains the revolution of its time, and not merely one, though the most prominent, of its kind.

- Eric Hobsbawm, The Age of Revolution. Vintage: New York, 1962. Pgs. 54-55.

When asked by Henry Kissinger in 1972 what he though of the impact of the French Revolution, Chou En Lai, the Chinese Premier and second to Mao Zedong, answered, "We Chinese feel that it is too soon to tell."

Hillary continued to boost her family values cred this week with more talk on the oft-derided Grand Theft Auto videogame. Apparently in the newest installment of Rockstar's franchise creation, Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, an easily located modification can be downloaded which allows the user to enact "pornographic" scenes with various ladyfriends of the main character. Apparently the sexual content under discussion is actually embedded in the game and unlocked by the modification. A couple of thoughts:

1. The reprehensible violence in this game, much more offensive than the sexual content, seems to draw exponentially more comment than, for example, recently mentioned film content of comparable nature.

2. This game is obviously targeted to kids, and the sexual content was created by the developers of the game (likely intended to be discovered in this way). So obviously the rating needs to be changed from "M" (which is carried by most major retailers, and available largely to children from age 7) to "Adult" (which isn't and would be more difficult to obtain). However, it seems to me, anyone who has the internet saavy to download the modification, and replace the orginal program file with the modified one, and has the interest in seeing two animated characters boink a) has already seen much more explicit content on the internet, and b) will be able to obtain the game whether they are forbidden from purchasing it or not.

I love the Times with a fiery burning passion

2005-06-15T16:51:00.000-04:00

but this critique of the recent series on class is a must-read for anyone who missed it (as I did) when ALDaily linked to it. Yes, class is still all about how much money you have. Isn't that strange?

And I hope everyone has seen the results of the Schiavo autopsy. She was blind and had not been abused. Of course, the autopsy will stop exactly none of the speculation.

If anyone is wondering where I will be next weekend, check this out. Wish you were here!

Larry King's Snot

2005-06-02T11:59:00.000-04:00

Bigups to Silivren for three straight.

So to begin with, Harry Shearer brings us a moment of zen on the Huffington Post. A commercial break discussion on the Larry King show with the senior Bushes. It isn't scandalous or anything, just kind of an odd, rare candid look at three formerly powerful people who are getting on in years. My favorite part is when King blows his nose.

Also, here is a link to Bill Moyers getting righteous about the appropriation of PBS. I have never heard such indignation in his voice, and he has some great words. My favorite part is when he quotes himself on NOW explaining why he has an American flag on his lapel:

So what's this doing here? Well, I put it on to take it back. The flag's been hijacked and turned into a logo - the trademark of a monopoly on patriotism. On those Sunday morning talk shows, official chests appear adorned with the flag as if it is the good housekeeping seal of approval. During the State of the Union, did you notice Bush and Cheney wearing the flag? How come? No administration's patriotism is ever in doubt, only its policies. And the flag bestows no immunity from error. When I see flags sprouting on official lapels, I think of the time in China when I saw Mao's little red book on every official's desk, omnipresent and unread.

But more galling than anything are all those moralistic ideologues in Washington sporting the flag in their lapels while writing books and running Web sites and publishing magazines attacking dissenters as un-American. They are people whose ardor for war grows disproportionately to their distance from the fighting. They're in the same league as those swarms of corporate lobbyists wearing flags and prowling Capitol Hill for tax breaks even as they call for more spending on war.

Also, here is Woodward this morning on how he met Deep Felt (that's my only comment on this business, I swear). OK, except for this: Hal Holbrook turned out to be a pretty good likeness. Except for those sweet glasses.

Finally, Human Events online has gathered a list of the 10 most harmful books of the 19th and 20th century, which of course ends up being a must read list. I thought all the pinkos 'round here would appreciate Marx topping Hitler.

UPDATE: I really hope you have all seen this video of John Bolton "discussing" the UN.

Women, men, math, and genius

2005-05-18T13:15:00.000-04:00

Larry Summers' comments in January about potential differential ability in men and women as an explanation for the dearth of women in science have been turned over in the media to the point of paralytic boredom. The debate over his comments seems to have centered around academic freedom, with Summers' partisans suggesting that the politically correct elite are stifling academic freedom by not permitting unfettered intellectual inquiry. Recently, however, there was a debate between people who actually know something about the topic.

Spending a semester in a course on the political economy of gender has made clear to me the extent to which data in sociobiology and evolutionary psychology continue to be open to a fair amount of interpretation. However, I am less interested in the question of whether men and women score differently on the SAT (obviously, they do) than what such a difference might mean.

Most women experience enough discouragement or simple lack of encouragement in math and science that that on its own might seem a sufficient explanation for their absence in the higher echelons of achievement. However, as Pinker points out, even a small difference in ability could have a large payoff at the outer regions of the bell curve. In that case, we would have to be able to measure difference in ability.

And that is where the real question lies, in my opinion. When we think we are measuring intrinsic aptitude, is that really what we are doing? Science involves a lot of different activities and skill-sets. Evolutionary biology and theoretical astrophysics are very different pursuits. The kinds of cognitive skills needed in the various sciences vary at least to a degree. Even if we stick to mathematics, an area where ability would seem most easily testable, it is not clear that we accurately manage to capture what makes someone a great mathematician. In part, this is because tests are not fine-meshed enough to capture outliers at the high end--on the GRE, an 800 math score is currently the 92nd percentile.

Further, however, even if we are able to accurately measure intelligence, we don't take seriously enough that the question of nature versus nurture has become passé. Whatever biological hardwiring we have never comes to expression in a manner unaffected by the environment. The class differences in performance on standardized tests and the fact that IQ scores are apparently increasing (although, I suspect, for other reasons than the article suggests) should be enough to demonstrate that fact.

Finally, Summers' suggestion that men and women simply have different preferences regarding how much they want to work is perhaps what one might expect from an economist who does not take Marxist analysis of social reproduction very seriously. That is, our society depends on someone making the choice to raise the children. The work of Gary Becker, among others, suggests that whoever ends up doing so will end up paying a high cost on the labor market. The way to combat the privatization of the cost of social reproduction is, of course, to socialize it, as the Scandinavian countries have to a degree done. The solution remains imperfect, as Shulamith Firestone pointed out, as long as women still have to bear the children. So ahoy the little pods that we'll be carrying around a hundred years from now with our fetuses inside.

Not quite ready to give up on the radical feminist idea that women can have it all, I still want to work for a fundamental restructuring of society. Perhaps what we need is fewer female math geniuses and more female political geniuses--people who are willing to fight and pay the price for future generations of women to be able to have fulfilling work and fulfilling family life. Separatism may be dead, but not necessarily because it was a bad solution. The price of radical political change is high, both personally and otherwise.

Accomplice to a murder or potential date?

2005-05-15T12:52:00.000-04:00

Imagine my suprise at turning to the arts section of the NYT today and discovering an article on a new installation at the Whitney. Not that interesting, you say? Well, the article opens with a lead-in on the composer of the music for the installation. It happens I know the guy. It happens that he is an accomplice to murder. It happens that the reason I know him is that my friend tried to hook me up with him the last time I was in Norway. Before telling me he was an accomplice to the second-most famous murder in Norway in the last 20 years (after "trippeldrapet"--a triple murder for inheritance). Thanks, darling. I've always wanted to date a death-metal musician. Or something.

I'd recommend visiting the installation, by the way, if for no other reason than that my friend's boyfriend (who is sweet and has never killed or assisted in killing anyone) plays on the musical soundtrack.

More seriously, the Times started a series that highlights the continuing importance of class in America. While I'm not too impressed with the level of analysis so far, that anyone is talking about the wholly taboo subject of class is encouraging to me. The Marxist dictum that "all that is solid melts into air" in the current world is given an interesting twist by the Slovenian philosopher and psychoanalyst Slavoj Zizek. He considers the presentation of the markets as rational places that reflect real-world considerations the premier example of ideology in the modern world. In other words, markets present themselves as responsive to material, on-the-ground facts. This stock went up for xyz reason, this currency fell for abc reason. Translation: although markets seem ephemeral and irrational, they really are about actual people and products--a classic ideological move to cover up the fact that markets really are ephemeral and irrational.

(Yes, I will blog about the Times. I'm retro that way--I also don't think blogging is the greatest advance in the history of journalism nor that globalization has completely voided all classical economic analyses nor that the rise of the religious right is unprecedented and inexplicable nor that religion is outdated or the opium of the people nor... well, more later.)

The friendly pope

2005-04-26T13:04:00.000-04:00

(Bet y'all thought I was never going to post)

So the former Cardinal Ratzinger has been pope for about two days, and already people are speaking of the friendlier, more inclusive pope. Apparently, he has spoken of reaching out to Muslims (and evangelizing them) and has also been nice. Therefore, he is nothing like the pope "we" thought Ratzinger would be. What were people expecting--that he would come out literally cracking a whip? That he would bite the heads off babies? This is a pope whose priorities Pat Robertson apparently shares, which is almost enough said if that weren't a fallacy in argument. Benedict XVI has been consistent in his advocacy of the absolute authority of the Catholic church, as I know from people who have argued with him about it face to face. See Miroslav Volf's book After Our Likeness for an incisive critique of Ratzinger's ecclesiology. After Ratzinger read it, he said to Volf, "You don't expect me to change my mind because of this, do you?"

The iron hand in the velvet glove is still the iron hand. The problem with Ratzinger is neither his demeanor nor his belief in the Catholic church as the only road to salvation: it is his belief that divine authority is vested in the hierarchy of the church.

Quickly, because I'm, like, busy...

2005-04-14T21:55:00.000-04:00

Two (insanely) appalling things:

First, this. I don't know what to say except it makes me think that I might not be opposed to assassinations in some instances. (Note: I'm serious here. This article is truly disturbing.)

Second, this. I was most appalled 1) with critics who didn't mention the multiple-levels-beneath-decent glorifyingly dehumanizing violence and 2) that it wasn't NC-17. Or NC-21. Or perhaps NC-117. (Note: I'm also serious here. Do not watch this movie.)

A brief multimedia section featuring three funny (to me) videos:

Here, here, and here.

Salad Toss

2005-04-01T10:15:00.000-05:00

There are moments in life too sublime for pedestrian verbiage. The video is available here - scroll down. It really is priceless.

A question: What happens if the pope goes into a coma and needs to be put on life support?

Isn't it wonderful when leaders of three religions in Jerusalem can finally agree on something?

You know how when you really love someone, you want to bite their finger off...

Ok, ok, by now you are probably thinking, "Enough links to random strangeness, this is supposed to be a serious blog, jackass." To that I say, "I laugh in the face of seriousness." Just one more thing: this guy is really mean.

UPDATE: Google tries its hand in the soft drink market. Or at least for today.

UPDATE: The Pope is dead, according to Drudge.

Is this thing STILL on?

2005-03-28T17:28:00.000-05:00

Go read this splendirific NBA insider blog by Suns 12th man Paul Shirley. (Who? Exactly. Thanks to The Sports Guy for the link.)

I don't really like Jonathan Chait (because he hates Dean), but this new TNR-National Review argument looks like it might get fun.

Jeremy Blachman comments on a "Gen-Y working in big firms" article. Screw Akin Gump, man. They are the ones who are flabby. Or something.

You know how the US puts out a Human Rights Report on every country each year? Well, China has countered with their own report, which the NY Times excerpted over the weekend.

TNR on Wolfowitz. Kevin Drum has more.

Slate section: Former Legal Affairs senior editor Emily Bazelon does a fine job filling in for Dahlia Lithwick on the SCOTUS beat today; she covers the oral arguments in Medellin v. Dretke (starring R. Ted Cruz). Also, this is the type of thing I mention ALL THE TIME when I'm watching the tube. I should've written something, dang it.

Two bits of wonderful news on the TV front: here and here.

This is an interesting site. I found it through a link to this. (The bubble's gonna burst, baby!) Don't you like how I'm so vague in my descriptions? Doesn't it entice you to click through? HOW EXCITING!

The John

2005-03-08T11:02:00.000-05:00

You think you're progressive? Well, the proof of your continued bigotry may rest right under your ... butt. Seems like a stretch at first, but the legal argument certainly seems to be sound (as for the relative importance of making the argument at all, well, that's another thing altogether). Article penned by a YLS professor (cue self-plauditory revelry from certain readers).

Also, I need to plug the best new movie rental site, GreenCine.com. Similar concept to Netflix and the new Blockbuster online, but with a virtually limitless collections of classics, independent and foreign films, and documentaries.

Finally, through the Godfather trilogy to The Sopranos and Growing Up Gotti, a Salon article traces the transformation of both the benevolent Mafia myth and the downfall of the respected father, as well as the connection between family values, writ large, and violence.

Blogger roundup

2005-03-01T09:11:00.000-05:00

I suppose it's time to get back to some more substantive posts (other people's substance, not mine).

Eric Alterman puts forward a nice list of ways the Bush administration could have been honest with us in selling this war.

Dear Joementum: Seriously, if you start supporting Bush's Social Security phaseout, there's gonna be hell to pay (DLCer Joshua Micah Marshall and hack Paul Begala--no raving leftists--hint at it here and here).

Maybe Syria's next and not Iran.

Kevin Drum links to a series in the LA Times about what he calls "the key economic story of the past 30 years: the steadily increasing risk and income volatility of the American middle class." Interesting stuff.

Sports Flash

2005-02-22T23:44:00.000-05:00

The Nebraska Cornhuskers mens' basketball team upset the #4 team in the country tonight. (Check out the "end zone" language in the story. Good times.)

You must read this instant classic from The Sports Guy about his weekend (Vegas, Shaq, all things big...).

And the NHL, like, cancelled its season or something. And I think baseball is starting spring training or something. I dunno. Who cares.

Man, sports is boring.

UPDATE: Looks like I may be buying a football jersey in the near future.

Guns, Trees and Filmmakers

2005-02-16T08:53:00.000-05:00

Straight out the pages of Wired, the American robot army comes to the NYT. A lot of this is a pipe dream (autonomous robots who know the difference between an enemy and a friend, for example) at this point, but here is something that isn't, a remote-controlled machine that comes equipped with a machine-gun and several cameras. Along with the unmanned drones Israel and the US military are now using, I see two things of interest in these stories:

1. My friends from college who spent (or spend) all of their time playing Bond and Halo are soon going to be very qualified for a military job.
2. These robotic soldiers will very soon be able to reduce the financial and human cost of fighting wars, which are pretty much the only things that seem capable of turning the American public against violence outside of our country. Yay.

The Kyoto Protocol goes into effect today. We suck.

Finally, Michael Moore has been honored once again.

UPDATE: Disaster strikes.

UPDATE 2: Saletan covers the robot soldier story and notes the most relevant detail from the NYT story that I didn't mention: these robots with machine guns will be deployed within two months in Iraq.

"News:" old, new, bad, good, etc.

2005-02-10T13:45:00.000-05:00

Target heir Mark Dayton has decided not to run for reelection in Minnesota. So--brace yourselves, here--Al Franken (of Stuart Smalley fame) is throwing his proverbial hat in the proverbial ring. I actually think he's got a shot (since MN has a great same-day voter registration policy).

For those of you who missed all the capital punishment goings-on out here in New England (where the state governments haven't, um, killed anybody in quite a while), check out this story and (even more remarkable) this transcript (pdf file).

Another heartwarming story from the "old news" file is here.

In the market for a new "car?" Check this out. Seriously, now. Insane.

A chink in the armor?

Drinking kills? Not always.

This is kind of a cool site, one of those "wow, the internet is soooo building new communities" types. Basically, you post your goals and it matches you up with other people with similar goals.

I remember back when pretty much everybody on this site was a Lakers fan. Those were the days. Just to keep you former (read: "fair-weather") fans in the loop, Rudy Tomjanovich has resigned as head coach and one of the names being bandied about is Phil Jackson. Bryant has been hurt for, like, 13 games now and the Lakers are just above .500 and barely holding onto the eighth playoff position in the Western Conference.

Man, this post was pretty lame. I'll do better next time. I promise.

UPDATE: Yeah, I got had by the whole Al Franken thing. Oops.

Rise and Shine, Campers

2005-02-07T09:18:00.000-05:00

Don't all rush to post at once.

One important note before I move on to the sexier bits. I neglected to post on the holiday of holidays, Groundhog Day. Please accept this late offering.

Another proponent of the Intelligent Design movement popped up on today's NYTimes Op-Ed page. The author argues, first of all, that ID is not a "religiously based idea," while acknowledging that it is often used as such. Michael Behe, the author of the op-ed piece, then goes on to lay out four claims of the ID movement, "based," he writes, "on physical evidence and a straightforward application of logic." The first, and central, claim is that one can often perceive design in nature. Analogically, we can recognize intelligence, rather than natural forces, behind Mount Rushmore (much like the Teleological "watchmaker" argument of Wm. Paley).

Right away, Behe's defense of ID seems to me to be more than slightly disingenuous. One cannot use the word "design" without implying a designer. ID does not have to say anything about a creator to carry this implication. Darwinian scientists would look at the same evidence ID researchers do and recognize complexity, but not design. Describing complexity as design requires an addition of a designer based not on evidence, but on the lack of evidence perceived in Darwinian evolutionary theory. While this addition may be completely rational, it is not, by definition, scientific. Behe's fourth claim acknowledges that there is controversy in asserting that "in the absence of any convincing non-design explanation, we are justified in thinking that real intelligent design was involved in life." Faith in a designer is justification for belief, but what angers some in the scientific community is that the faith is not acknowledged.

In this TAP article recounting the emergence of the Intelligent Design movement, the author sees continuity with earlier creation science movements and suggests that the movement itself has evolved into a more sophisticated enemy of Darwinism, but still feels that the agenda of ID is often visible.

So the question is, what do VP readers think about Intelligent Design?

The Revolution Never Seems to be Televised

2005-01-28T09:56:00.000-05:00

Rumors are once again flying that Google is creating a web browser. Google has recently hired several Firefox programmers, including their former lead engineer, Ben Goodger, profiled in this month's Wired. Hiring Firefox's lead engineer seems to be a rather large giveaway that Google has its sights set on Explorer. So here's the question: for those of us who have acquired a taste for Firefox, will we jump ship to Google when the time comes? I certainly will mutiny if the product is as good as we've come to expect with Google. Brand loyalty is dead.

I think this article by Jack Shafer is very intelligent. It always takes us a few years to temper our revolutionary hopes for new tech (not to underestimate the revolutionary character of this blog, of course). But these things never seem to change the nature of the medium much, just the speed. Guess I will have to wait a while to enjoy pure being without physicality. Damn you science fiction!

Ringo ate my baby

2005-01-27T16:08:00.000-05:00

Soon we can all enjoy the benefits of hooves. Sure, some animal rights activists are bothered, but I have a feeling that somewhere out there, Peter Singer is dancing.

Look, up in the sky, it's non-interesting former celebrity-man!

And finally, the FDA takes a much needed step towards making ARVs cheaper.

Briefly

2005-01-27T01:19:00.000-05:00

Frankly, Hillary Clinton doesn't excite me all that much. I probably won't be supporting her in the 2008 primary, for instance (I've done my time with a moderate candidate who's perceived as the far-left fringe). But I tend to like this new tack she has taken on abortion. Read it and let me know what you think.

UPDATE: Andrew Sullivan was impressed, too.

Quick shots

2005-01-25T21:27:00.000-05:00

This column's anti-Christian tone is a good example of why I don't like the militantly pro-abortion Katha Pollitt. (Shades of anti-God bigot and leftist-turned-hyper-hawk-Bush-apologist Christopher Hitchens there.)

Whither the PRI?

Just a bloggy reminder why Gonzales should be opposed.

Sometimes you read the results of a study and are just amazed.

Think of the children!

Trying not to think about the next four years . . .

2005-01-21T21:32:00.000-05:00

I'm going to post a couple things here in their entirety because they're pretty short and, quite frankly, I don't trust people to click through to read them.

First, courtesy of Matthew Yglesias, who apparently has a stronger stomach than I and watched Bush's inaugural address, a helpful list that lays out current American foreign policy Cliff's Notes style:

"Outposts of Tyranny":
Cuba
Burma
North Korea
Iran
Zimbabwe
Belarus
Allies In the War On Terror
Tunisia
Saudi Arabia
Uzbekistan
Egypt
Jordan
Kuwait
Ambiguous Third Category
Russia
China
Vietnam
Syria
Specifically Cited By Bush Administration As Models of Democracy
Pakistan
Algeria
One Election Makes a Democracy In...
Afghanistan
Iraq
Palestine after Arafat died
One Election Does Not A Democracy Make In...
Venezuela
Haiti
Palestine before Arafat died

Next, Eric Maierson over at McSweeney's makes another must-read list:

THINGS I'D PROBABLY SAY
IF THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION WERE JUST
A WEEKLY TV SHOW AND I WERE
A REGULAR VIEWER.
By Eric Maierson

"Now, see, you can't just go and do something like that. That would be illegal."

"Boy, someone's gonna get fired for that."

"Wasn't that the one who made all the mistakes? Why is she getting promoted?"

"Come on, in real life you'd never get away with something like that."

"They really expect us to believe that?"

"Am I the only one confused here?"

"Does this make any sense to you?"

"Why is this still on?"

By the way, I'm done with all my law school exams for my whole life (except, um, the bar) as of yesterday. But no eloquent JSK-style farewell from me. More of just a good riddance (I do have a couple of papers to finish up yet). Anyway, I just wish this had happened to ME.

Oh, and James Dobson can go to hell.

Out of the blue

2005-01-17T20:23:00.000-05:00

Yes, Bush hasn't even been inaugurated into his second term yet, but it's never too early to start thinking of 2008. And I have to say that if I had to choose from all the mentioned candidates (those declared and those who have yet to declare), I'd probably agree with Oliver Willis and go with this guy.

Yup.

War stuff. Barry. And TV thoughts.

2005-01-16T13:14:00.000-05:00

To pile on WT's take on the Iraq War, who ever would've guessed that Iraq would become a terrorist haven? What a shocker!

Ah, the Pentagon. Never making mistakes. Always getting involved in such groundbreaking research.

I didn't know Dave Barry was retiring from his column. Sad news.

I recommend reading this article about "egocasting." The TV addiction stuff rang a little too true for me, unfortunately (C-Dawgg can probably attest to that...especially the symptom of "impatience"). However, I agree with little Rosen says about iPods. It seemed to be a weak distraction from the more dangerous point she was making about TiVo and TVs.

In that last article, there was a brief mention of The Wire, which is an HBO series I just started watching on DVD after reading its high praise on the internet. Well, it lived up to any expectations I had. It's now my favorite show, bumping out The West Wing (though that show has had a small renaissance with My Hero Josh leaving the White House to run an idealistic presidential campaign). The Wire is based on the Baltimore drug wars (centered just a few blocks west of where I lived a couple of summers ago). It basically pits a group of crusading cops against some West Baltimore drug lords who run a very successful and hierarchical operation. But the moralizing quotient is super-low and there are good guys and bad guys on each side. Actually, I'd go further than that and say that nobody is portrayed as really "good" or "bad." The characters are, at best, flawed and trying hard. Anyway, the head writers have spent many years in Baltimore and written a couple of excellent books (Homicide and The Corner which have actually been made into other HBO shows). In the past couple days, two articles in the NY Times have exhibited just how realistic their new show is (see here and here). When a TV show is this well done, watching it back-to-back on DVD with no commercials and few breaks is really enjoyable because of the long-term character development and satisfyingly slow plot. It's the best thing I've seen on any screen this year--even better than Garden State or Eternal Sunshine or Sideways or Maria Full of Grace or Napoleon Dynamite, which are the best movies I've seen this year. (Also recommended: Friday Night Lights, Closer, and In Good Company . . . keep in mind that there are at least a half dozen 2004 movies that I haven't seen yet that I expect would make these lists.) So go rent The Wire. And feel free to exhibit some of your TV addiction in the comments.

Clear as mud

2005-01-14T21:45:00.000-05:00

Okay. I've been harrassed, threatened, and guilted into posting something against my better judgment. [I should state that this post is based on my limited understanding -- I don't work on criminal matters.] N-Dawgg suggests that I post about a long and eagerly awaited Supreme Court decision that was handed down yesterday in United States v. Booker. Here's a good article about from the New York Times. [On a side note, what's up with the rumors that the NYT is considering charging for online access to all its content?] Booker is a big deal in criminal and constitutional law, but to understand why, some background on how criminal system works may be useful.

A criminal defendant charged with any serious crime that may result in incarceration has a right to a jury trial under the Sixth Amendment. Generally, a criminal case proceeds in two steps: first, there is determination of guilt (i.e., a guilty plea, conviction, or acquittal); then, if guilty, a determination of the sentence. The underlying issue in Booker and two earlier cases, Blakely and Apprendi, is how the Sixth Amendment applies to these two phases of a criminal case. There is no dispute as to whether the right to a jury trial extends to the determination of guilt; but, what is vigorously debated is whether there is a right to jury trial for the second, sentencing phase of trial. Up until a few years ago, this question was never an issue, and from what I understand, it was never asked.

So, the criminal court system basically operated like this: a jury would acquit or convict, then a court would impose sentence based on the jury's verdict. In federal court, the sentencing regime involved a judge using mandatory guidelines that calculated a defendant's sentence based on (1) a base offense level dependent on the crime committed then (2) adding any points for specified enhancements (e.g., for brandishing a gun during the commission of the crime) and finally (3) subtracting points for specified downward departures (e.g., for cooperating with the government). All this would yield a number, which would correspond with a sentence range--for example, 130 to 152 months. The judge, then, would have limited discretion to sentence within that range. [Note: All sentence ranges used in these examples are made up -- I don't remember actual ranges.] Under the federal guidelines, judges had to abide within this very mechanical system. Departures outside of the guideline ranges -- even when equities weighed heavily against a long sentence -- were subject to rigorous review.

Under the federal sentencing guidelines, the enhancements were -- at least, up until last summer -- based on findings of fact made by the judge and not the jury. In other words, the judge -- and not a jury -- determined during sentencing phase whether or not the defendant had "brandished" a gun. This factual determination, furthermore, was made using a "preponderence of evidence" standard of proof, rather than the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard used by the jury. The effect of this was that, in some cases, the enhancements led to a mandatory sentence longer than one that would have been permitted based on the jury's finding alone.

For example, let's say a defendant was convicted by a jury of bank robbery, which leads to a a sentence range of 110 to 120 months before any enhancements. But at sentencing, the judge makes several factual findings including (1) kidnapping, (2) brandishing a gun, and (3) stealing X amount of money -- the jury was not asked to make any such findings in its verdict. These three enhancements increase the guideline range to 150-162 months. Thus, the minimum sentence of 150 months would be greater than the 120 months permitted based on findings made by the jury. The issue is whether this longer mandatory sentence violates the Sixth Amendment right to jury. In a series of decisions, culminating in Booker, the Supreme Court said yes.

In the Blakely decision last summer, the Supreme Court invalidated the State of Washington's sentencing scheme under this reasoning, but didn't expressly invalidate the federal sentencing scheme. Nevertheless, the Blakely decision cast doubt on the constitutionality of the federal system and left everyone -- prosecutors, defense counsel, and courts -- scrambling to adjust. The problem, of course, was that without more guidance, no one knew what exactly to do. Should judges stop using the mandatory guidelines? Should juries make explicit findings on every possible fact that could affect sentencing? Many prosecutors adopted this latter option (which was somewhat unwieldy and problematic for some other reasons). No one was quite sure what procedure would be constitutional.

Well, the Court partially answered that question in Booker by stating that (1) the guidelines were no longer mandatory, (2) judges would have discretion to sentence, (3) however, the guidelines were to be "advisory." The Court reasoned that what made the guidelines unconstitutional was that they were "mandatory" -- thus, as long as they weren't binding on judges, any sentence given by the judge does not violate the Sixth Amendment (but I assume that an excessively harsh sentence might violate another constitutional right).

That is my [probably incomplete and flawed] understanding of Booker. What will result from this new sentencing regime? I'm not sure. Most commentators seem to think that little will change in the large majority of cases because federal judges are used to relying on the guidelines to maintain uniformity in sentencing throughout the country. What most courts are not excited about, however, is that Booker leaves open some important questions. For example, does it apply retroactively? The mandatory incarnation of the federal guidelines were in effect for more than 15 years.

When the Supreme Court eventually does answer that question, I doubt it will make Booker retroactive. If it is found to be retroactively applicable, it would mean resentencing a lot of people. [The sentencing court, of course, could just adopt the same sentence, but that would still require a new hearing.] If you were currently incarcerated, wouldn't you file a habeas petition to see if you can get a shorter sentence? I imagine there's a lot of legal drafting going on right now. Resentencing may or may not be the constitutional and fair remedy, if it is required, so be it. But federal district court judges generally do not like (1) uncertainty about what it is supposed to do and (2) doing anything twice (like when they get reversed and have to start a new trial). Until there is a definitive ruling one way or another, things may get messy as the district and circuit courts sort it out. And, in addition to retroactivity, there are other procedural and substantive issues to be worked out over time.

Well, this post should keep the dawggs at bay for a while. For those who are interested, this site has a lot more information and commentary.

What to Wear to a Colonial Party; and Poll Dancing

2005-01-13T13:57:00.000-05:00

Ah, the good old days. When royals didn't have to act out their world-subjugating desires in private. As my friend Kevin says, "Honestly though, if you had a line of greyhounds that were as perilously interbred as that lot you wouldn't be able to give the pups away."

Also, don't you love the numerical precision with which pollsters help us understand the pulse of the people? My favorite stats are these: 37% of those polled believe that the United States and its allies are winning the war on terrorism. 58% of those polled approve of Pres. Bush's handling of the war on terrorism. Hmm.

Where Missles Die

2005-01-12T16:26:00.000-05:00

Oh well, we looked.

Theodicy and Poetry

2005-01-11T10:16:00.000-05:00

God always comes up amidst discussions of tragedy, natural or otherwise. Doesn't a responsible Christian have to conclude that God does not involve herself in either the saving or the taking of lives? Is there any way to discuss this without resorting to trite slogans?

On an entirely different note, can anyone explain to me what distinguishes a poem from prose anymore? Is this a good poem or a crappy one? I just can't tell anymore. What are the criteria for judging good poetry? Cue any readers who teach english in Nebraska.

For example, the following poem, excerpted from an anthology called The Best American Poetry from the last year:

No, dirt aliens: don't waste good mascara, fiber gives you confi-dence. Spin doctors vs. gravity, do you spandex wooden leg plus spazhemp tempi seize the fey crawlspatiality creatures peel off. Barbie pro-tons slobber the manual seedling wrapped in human skin. Happy puppypreconscious vouchers don't brownnose your pal's girlfriend, a swaggerunanointed affect in its gob phase. Automated preparation H—a non-goosing, a midriff melody—stir the rack up…mere child has herpermit.
Bruce Andrews, “from Dang Me”

Now don't get me wrong, I can appreciate a certain druggy, beat poet, a-sensical cachet to this piece of work, but what separates this from druggy, beat poet prose?

More Alberto

2005-01-07T14:35:00.000-05:00

So Slate's Chris Suellentrop has a great article up about Gonzales's appearance before the Senate Judiciary yesterday. Here's the gist: Gonzales believes "the president has the power to authorize torture by immunizing American personnel from prosecution for it[.]" Three words: worse than Ashcroft. Just because he's Latino doesn't mean he's a moderate, folks. Or non-totalitarian. (Oh, make sure to note the last paragraph's shout-out to YLS Dean Koh.)

Though there's a permanent link to it on the right side of this page, many of you may be unfamiliar with the magazine Legal Affairs. Basically, it's a general interest magazine (think Harper's, The Atlantic, New Yorker, etc.) with an eye toward legal issues; it's relatively young but each issue gets better. As an introduction, here's the cover article from last issue (written by a former classmate of mine). It's an astounding story. Anyway, I highly recommend the magazine. That's all.

Grab bag

2005-01-05T16:50:00.000-05:00

How heartening, Mr. Gonzales. I'm sure the Abu Ghraib "detainees" feel better. Note to Senate Dems: Gonzales will be no better than Ashcroft. Vote no.

Count N-Dawgg on the Angelides bandwagon.

Some notable corrections of 2004.

I recommend reading Josh Marshall's posts over at TPM with regard to what he calls the Fainthearted Faction (Dems who oppose Social Security, basically). This is shaping up to be the most important issue of this session of Congress and we can't have backsliders/stabbers.

Finally, I leave you with a Susan Sontag quote on religion in America (I stole it from a dKos post):

Perhaps the most important source of the new (and not so new) American radicalism is what used to be viewed as a source of conservative values: namely, religion. Many commentators have noted that perhaps the biggest difference between the United States and most European countries (old as well as new according to current American distinction) is that in the United States religion still plays a central role in society and public language. But this is religion American style: more the idea of religion than religion itself. . . .

The United States is a generically religious society. That is, in the United States it's not important which religion you adhere to, as long as you have one. To have a ruling religion, even a theocracy, that would be just Christian (or a particular Christian denomination) would be impossible. Religion in America must be a matter of choice. This modern, relatively contentless idea of religion, constructed along the lines of consumerist choice, is the basis of American conformism, self-righteousness, and moralism (which Europeans often mistake, condescendingly, for Puritanism). Whatever historic faiths the different American religious entities purport to represent, they all preach something similar: reform of personal behavior, the value of success, community cooperativeness, tolerance of other's choices. (All virtues that further and smooth the functioning of consumer capitalism.) The very fact of being religious ensures respectability, promotes order, and gives the guarantee of virtuous intentions to the mission of the United States to lead the world.

HAPPY NEW YEee...oh, whatever...

2005-01-04T21:20:00.000-05:00

If you, dear reader, want this blog to rise from the ashes, please post some sort of comment (no matter how inane).

If people gonna be readin' and commentin', we'll get this party started again.

Mos def.

OUT

Dean Screa--- er...Speaks

2004-12-08T14:53:00.000-05:00

Howard speaks for me and many, many other like-minded Reform Democrats.

Remarks made by Governor Howard Dean on the Future of the Democratic Party. Given at The George Washington University on December 8, 2004.

Thank you for that introduction. It's a pleasure to be here.

Let me tell you what my plan for this Party is:

We're going to win in Mississippi
...and Alabama
...and Idaho
...and South Carolina.

Four years ago, the President won 49 percent of the vote. The Republican Party treated it like it was a mandate, and we let them get away with it.

Fifty one percent is not a mandate either. And this time we're not going to let them get away with it.

Our challenge today is not to re-hash what has happened, but to look forward, to make the Democratic Party a 50-state party again, and, most importantly, to win.

To win the White House and a majority in Congress, yes. But also to do the real work that will make these victories possible -- to put Democratic ideas and Democratic candidates in every office -- whether it be Secretary of State, supervisor of elections, county commissioner or school board member.

Here in Washington, it seems that after every losing election, there's a consensus reached among decision-makers in the Democratic Party is that the way to win is to be more like Republicans.

I suppose you could call that philosophy: if you didn't beat 'em, join them.

I'm not one for making predictions -- but if we accept that philosophy this time around, another Democrat will be standing here in four years giving this same speech. we cannot win by being "Republican-lite." We've tried it; it doesn't work.
The question is not whether we move left or right. It's not about our direction. What we need to start focusing on... is the destination.

There are some practical elements to the destination.

The destination of the Democratic Party requires that it be financially viable, able to raise money not only from big donors but small contributors, not only through dinners and telephone solicitations and direct mail, but also through the Internet and person-to-person outreach.

The destination of the Democratic Party means making it a party that can communicate with its supporters and with all Americans. Politics is at its best when we create and inspire a sense of community. The tools that were pioneered in my campaign -- like blogs, and meetups, and streaming video -- are just a start. We must use all of the power and potential of technology as part of an aggressive outreach to meet and include voters, to work with the state parties, and to influence media coverage.

The most practical destination is winning elective office. And we must do that at every level of government. The way we will rebuild the Democratic Party is not from consultants down, but from the ground up.

We have some successes to build on. We raised more money than the RNC, and we did so by attracting thousands of new small donors. This is the first time in my memory that the DNC is not coming out of a national campaign in debt. We trained tens of thousands of new activists. We put together the most sophisticated get-out-the-vote operation our Party has ever had. We registered millions of new voters, including a record number of minority and young voters. And we saw those new voters overwhelmingly vote Democrat.

Now we need to build on our successes while transforming the Democratic Party into a grassroots organization that can win in 50 states.

I have seen all the doomsday predictions that the Democratic Party could shrink to become a regional Party. A Party of the Northeast and the Pacific Northwest.

We cannot be a Party that seeks the presidency by running an 18-state campaign. We cannot be a party that cedes a single state, a single District, a single precinct, nor should we cede a single voter.

As many of the candidates supported by my organization Democracy for America showed -- people in places that we've too long ignored are hungry for an alternative; they're hungry for new ideas and new candidates, and they're willing to elect Democrats.

Since we started Democracy for America last March, we raised over $5 million, mostly from small donors. That money was given to 748 candidates in 46 states and at every level of government.

We helped a Democratic governor get elected in Montana and a Democratic mayor get elected in Salt Lake County, Utah.

We helped Lori Saldana in San Diego. Lori, a Latina grassroots environmental organizer was outspent in both the primary and the general, won a seat on the state assembly.
We also helped Anita Kelly become the first African-American woman elected to her circuit court in Montgomery Alabama.

Fifteen of the candidates who we helped win last month never ran for elective office before.

And in Texas, a little known candidate who had been written off completely ran the first competitive race against Tom Delay in over a decade.

There are no red states or blue states, just American states. And if we can compete at all levels and in the most conservative parts of the country, we can win ... at any level and anywhere.

People will vote for Democratic candidates in Texas, and Alabama, and Utah if we knock on their door, introduce ourselves, and tell them what we believe.

There is another destination beyond strong finances, outreach, and campaigns.

That destination is a better, stronger, smarter, safer, healthier America.

An America where we don't turn our back on our own people.

That's the America we can only build with conviction.

When some people say we should change direction, in essence they are arguing that our basic or guiding principles can be altered or modified.

They can't.

On issue after issue, we are where the majority of the American people are.

What I want to know is at what point did it become a radical notion to stand up for what we believe?

Over fifty years ago, Harry Truman said, "We are not going to get anywhere by trimming or appeasing. And we don't need to try it."

Yet here we are still making the same mistakes.

Let me tell you something: there's only one thing Republican power brokers want more than for us to lurch to the left -- and that's for us to lurch to the right.

What they fear most is that we may really begin fighting for what we believe -- the fiscally responsible, socially progressive values for which Democrats have always stood and fought.

I'll give this to Republicans. They know the America they want. They want a government so small that, in the words of one prominent Republican, it can be drowned in a bathtub.

They want a government that runs big deficits, but is small enough to fit into your bedroom.
They want a government that is of, by, and for their special interest friends.

They want a government that preaches compassion but practices division.

They want wealth rewarded over work.

And they are willing to use any means to get there.

In going from record surpluses to record deficits, the Republican Party has relinquished the mantle of fiscal responsibility.

And now they're talking about borrowing another $2 trillion to take benefits away from our Senior Citizens.

In going from record job creation to record job loss, they have abandoned the mantle of economic responsibility.

In cutting health care, education, and community policing programs... and in failing to invest in America's inner cities, or distressed rural communities... they certainly have no desire to even claim the mantle of social responsibility.

In their refusal to embrace real electoral reform or conduct the business in government in the light of day, they are hardly the model of civic responsibility.

In their willingness to change the rules so that their indicted leaders can stay in power, they have even given up any claim on personal responsibility.

And in starting an international conflict based on misleading information, I believe they have abdicated America's moral responsibility, as well.

There is a Party of fiscal responsibility... economic responsibility.... social responsibility... civic responsibility... personal responsibility... and moral responsibility.

It's the Democratic Party.

We need to be able to say strongly, firmly, and proudly what we believe.

Because we are what we believe.

And we believe every person in America should have access to affordable health care. It is wrong that we remain the only industrialized nation in the world that does not assure health care for all of its citizens.

We believe the path to a better future goes directly through our public schools. I have nothing against private schools, parochial schools and home schooling. Parents with the means and inclination should choose whatever they believe is best for their children. But those choices must never come at the expense of what has been -- and must always be -- the great equalizer in our society -- public education.

We believe that if you put in a lifetime of work, you have earned a retirement of dignity -- not one that is put at risk by your government or unethical business practices.

The first time our nation balanced its budget, it was Andrew Jackson, father of the Democratic Party, who did it. The last time our nation balanced its budget, it was Bill Clinton who did it. I did it every year as Governor. Democrats believe in fiscal responsibility and we're the only ones who have delivered it.

We believe that every single American has a voice and that it should be heard in the halls of power everyday. And it most certainly must be heard on Election Day. Democracies around the world look to us as a model. How can we be worthy of their aspirations when we haven't done enough to guarantee accurate elections for our own citizens.

We believe in a strong and secure America... And we believe we will be stronger by having a moral foreign policy.

We need to embrace real political reform -- because only real reform will pry government from the grasp of the special interests who have made a mockery of reform and progress for far too long.

The pundits have said that this election was decided on the issue of moral values. I don't believe that. It is a moral value to provide health care. It is a moral value to educate our young people. The sense of community that comes from full participation in our Democracy is a moral value. Honesty is a moral value.

If this election had been decided on moral values, Democrats would have won.

It is time for the Democratic Party to start framing the debate.

We have to learn to punch our way off the ropes.

We have to set the agenda.

We should not hesitate to call for reform -- reform in elections, reform in health care and education, reforms that promote ethical business practices. And, yes, we need to talk about some internal reform in the Democratic Party as well, and I'll be discussing that more specifically in the days ahead.

Reform is the hallmark of a strong Democratic Party.

Those who stand in the way of reform cannot be the focus of our attention for only four months out of every four years.

Reform is a daily battle.

And we must pursue those reforms with conviction -- every day, at all levels, in 50 states.

A little while back, at a fundraiser, a woman came up to me. She identified herself as an evangelical Christian from Texas. I asked her what you are all wondering -- why was she supporting me. She said there were two reasons. The first was that she had a child who had poly-cystic kidney disease, and that illness made it impossible for their family to get health care.

The second thing she said was, "The other reason we're with you is because evangelical Christians are people of deep conviction, and you're a person of deep conviction. I may not agree with you on everything, but what we want more than anything else from our government is that when something happens to our family or something happens to our country -- it's that the people in office have deep conviction."

We are what we believe. And the American people know it.

And I believe that over the next two... four... ten years...

Election by election...

State by state...

Precinct by precinct...

Door by door...

Vote by vote...

We're going to lift our Party up...

And we're going to take this country back for the people who built it.

Word.

Election results

2004-11-03T01:27:00.000-05:00

Hands down, the worst night of my life.

Not exaggerating.

I got your links right here

2004-09-14T21:17:00.000-04:00

Where is everybody? JSK? Wheat Thin? JC Superstar (haven't heard from you since the "great" Nader "debate")?

So it's been three years since 9/11. "My" church thought it would be appropriate to sing America the Beautiful during the service. Appropriate? Anyway, this post by Matthew Yglesias was something I thought I'd pass along.

It's never too early to start thinking about 2008, is it? I'm not sure which possible presidential candidate is scarier: this dude or this dude. Not that it matters, since this Husker is going to get the Republican nomination anyway (you heard it here first).

Did you see that crazy melee between the Texas Rangers bullpen and Oakland fans? Personally, I haven't heard enough criticism of the fans. Sure the pitcher who threw the chair into the crowd should be punished harshly (one-year suspension, lifetime expulsion, whatever), but one's status as a "fan" doesn't excuse outrageous violent behavior.

Um...um...hi-larious.....

Man. Now I'm thinkin' I should have nine kids when I get older. Or more. For the nation's future.

You didn't forget about cycling just because Lance Armstrong and the TDF aren't on TV every day, did you? You know, La Vuelta Espana is goin' on.

For old time's sake, Bill Simmons's tribute to 1984 (the year).

And remember the Sloganator? It was back yesterday, briefly. Links here and here and here.

Finally, what would a post be without a link to Slate? Here's Part 3 of Why the Electoral College System Sucks. P.S. The Amars think it sucks, too.

[Insert invitation to comment here]

Cry for help

2004-09-10T14:17:00.000-04:00

Ha ha. So there, you doubters. Perhaps you have a different definition of "around," but posting the SAME week as Labor Day counts for me. Yee-haw.

Um, so, here's the deal. There are parts of this template that I hate. First, the color of the font. I don't like reading white letters on a dark background. Second, the color scheme in general. And there are other little things.

Unfortunately, I have the html skills of a 2-year old. I can mess around with colors and sizes and fonts but our particular template has other things going on that confuse me. I don't really want to change the template again, but I might be driven to it unless there are other suggestions from the peanut gallery.

OUT

Relaunch

2004-08-14T15:03:00.000-04:00

So obviously we've been ignoring this site. Don't fret, though. We're coming back with a vengeance around Labor Day. We return to fight the fight. Or something.

Expect a new look, a new community, and a new commitment to Marxism. Except not really that last one.

Seriously, check back then and join in the fray.

Re Reagan

2004-06-07T20:10:00.000-04:00

For a couple reasons, I'm generally going to hold my tongue on the recent death of an ex-president; let's just say I'm not crying myself to sleep at night.

But I will link to this post by Brian Leiter. And Nathan Newman's screed here. And David Corn's list in The Nation. Okay, I should stop.

Dreading finals

2004-06-07T02:32:00.000-04:00

ABC finally put on a NBA playoff game on network television--and it was a 87-75 clunker. If this game was any indication the rest of the series, this is going to be ugly and boring. Game 1 was so boring that even B and C-list Hollywood stars were getting TV time during the game. I would rather watch regular season baseball (or even Stanley Cup hockey). I hope this years NBA finals generates the worst TV ratings ever--the NBA, ABC, and whoever else is involved in NBA broadcasts deserve no more than that for depriving non-cable subscribers even Sunday games during the conference finals--Sunday games! Watching Sunday games on network TV is a fundamental right of U.S. citizenship. (After all, the airwaves are public property!) NBC wouldn't have done denied us Sunday games--even in Round 1.

Of interest

2004-05-31T18:30:00.000-04:00

From the LAT: "Americans are awash in alliteration. . . ."

MD vs. JD

2004-05-28T02:07:00.000-04:00

From Law.com:

The 12-physician Orthopedic Specialty Group, with offices in Fairfield, Stratford and Shelton, has put hundreds of Connecticut trial lawyers on notice that the cost for their attendance at depositions and trials is about to soar, due to rising malpractice insurance costs.

In a May 7 letter to lawyers on its mailing list, Dr. Robert A. Stanton explained his group has "updated" its fees to a startling $12,000 per day for court appearances. It now charges a similarly exorbitant $4,000 for the first two hours of a deposition, and $1,000 per hour thereafter. "All services will be required to be paid in advance," the letter states.

Several lawyers said the hike appears to be a sharp departure from doctors calculating depositions and trial time on the basis of work time lost -- normally in the $300-to-$600-an-hour range.

...

The fee escalation "looks like we're getting into trench warfare," said John L. Bonee III, a Hartford, Conn., trial lawyer. A longtime proponent of civility in law practice, Bonee suggested, "Maybe it's time that doctors and lawyers sit down in a big powwow and get this under control."

This puts the the dentist-doctor dispute in perspective.

DDS vs. MD

2004-05-27T16:57:00.000-04:00

According to this LAT article, oral surgeons and plastic surgeons are lobbying the California legislature over a "scope of practice" dispute about which professionals are authorized to perform elective cosmetic surgery. And it's getting ugly:

The debate has exposed the resentment between the various castes of healers. The oral surgeons regularly portray the plastic surgeons as prima donnas who fled the late-night world of the emergency room, where treating the injured supersedes performing a "wallet biopsy" to make sure they are adequately insured.

Cosmetic surgeons say the oral surgeons are trying to elevate themselves from the pedestrian realm of dentistry, which does not carry the same prestige that physicians hold.

"That's been a problem for the dental profession over the years. They've suffered from an inferiority complex," said Dr. Robert Roth, a Fremont dermatologist and dental school graduate who says dental courses "are watered down compared to what the medical schools teach."

Despite such arguments, so far the oral surgeons are winning. Their bill passed in the Senate on May 19. An aggressive lobbying campaign to kill the measure in the Assembly has been underway for weeks, and people on both sides predict the fight will grow more intense there.

"With increasing regulation and decreasing reimbursements, the entire medical community is looking for a financial life raft," said Scheer, the Rancho Mirage oral surgeon. "And of course the elective [surgery] market is that life raft."

The article says that this isn't the first high profile "scope of practice" dispute (opthamologists and optometrists, physicians and physician's assistants) and definitely won't be the last.

Goodbye

2004-05-21T00:15:00.000-04:00

Well, this is it (I think). Just finished my last exam here at school, which I'll turn in tomorrow morning. I'm not much for saying goodbye, but one special goodbye seems to be in order: good bye to the law school network. We've spent countless hours together over the years: news, sports, email, posting on VP, chatting with other friends, and what not. You made some classes bearable, other classes more enjoyable, and (in all honesty) probably ruined a few good classes too. That's it for me. But don't be too sad, you'll have one more semester to interfere with N-Dawgg's legal education!

Neighborhood Watch

2004-05-20T00:58:00.000-04:00

The NYT has this article on Fundrace.org, a website that takes public information about campaign contributions and organizes it by neighborhood. What have I learned? New Haven bankrolls Democrats; Loma Linda does not.

American values

2004-05-11T02:10:00.000-04:00

The Abu Ghraib scandal is inconsistent with American values.
The Abu Ghraib scandal is (unfortunately) consistent with American values.

CNN Poll:

Of those surveyed, 73 percent said they believed the abuse documented in an Army report was unjustified, and only 23 percent said it could be justified under some circumstances.

Only 23 percent?
Another poll question: Are you bothered by Iraqi prisoner abuse?

79% A great deal or a fair amount
11% Not much
9% Not at all

Baseball Statistic Spotlight, Part 2

2004-05-06T10:34:00.000-04:00

Winning percentage: Number of wins divided number of games played. Thanks to WT for the heads up.

2 must-reads on Abu Ghraib:

2004-05-06T00:34:00.000-04:00

William Saletan in Slate
Philip Kennicott in the Washington Post (Style section for some reason...courtesy of JSK)

On a wholly different subject, Gary Payton sucks.

Late awards addition

2004-05-05T09:58:00.000-04:00

Best idea that Ralph will ignore: naming Kerry's electors as his electors

Sporadically-given VP awards

2004-05-05T00:45:00.000-04:00

Idea most likely to get young people to vote: US considers drafting women and raising age of eligibility to 34

TV show that's most likely going to involve some really despicable people: The Apprentice with lawyers

Articles that should have been written by JSK (tie): Kerry (or Bush) landslide and Coalition Provisional Authority's authority

Best pro-Bush activist group: Billionaires for Bush

Nicest bike ridden by presidential candidate: John Kerry's Serotta

Outrage of the day: Wall Street Journal editorial

Outrage of the week: Sudan is elected to UN human rights commission

Outrage of the month: John Negroponte is nominated to be U.S. Ambassador to Iraq

Outrage of the year (so far): the atrocities at Abu Ghraib (link to horrifying pictures here, accompanying Sy Hersh article)

Baseball statistic spotlight

2004-05-05T00:12:00.000-04:00

Hopefully, this will become a regular feature of the blog. Today's statistic is the Relative Power Index: "The basic formula is 25% team winning percentage, 50% opponents' average winning percentage, and 25% opponents' opponents' average winning percentage." It measures a team's performance while taking into account strength of schedule. A strong argument could be made that the team with the best RPI is the best team in baseball at the moment. I wonder which team is on top?

Hometown news

2004-05-04T16:24:00.000-04:00

Looks like Redlands hasn't been overlooked by the ACLU. I wonder if my elementary school (Redlands Junior Academy) joined the students from across the street (Arrowhead Christian Academy) in protest. Probably not.

Confirming stereotypes

2004-05-02T23:46:00.000-04:00

Is it sharing time? I'll start:

So me and my boo were cruisin' in our new ride this afternoon, not enjoying the rain. As always, there's construction going on over by I-95. This particular stretch of road requires two lanes to merge into one for a bit. Of course, there are always people ignoring all the merge signs and speeding past people until the very last second and then forcing themselves into the other lane like selfish fools. We were sitting behind a white Lincoln sedan and a black Hummer pulled up next to us and then attempted to force his way into our lane sans blinker. Said Lincoln (I'm assuming the driver was an older person, though we couldn't identify the sex) pulled a nice move and moved up real close to the car in front of them. The Hummer jerked toward the sedan in a threatening manner and then the cretin leaned out of his window and spat down on the Lincoln. Following that civilized display with some loud obscenities, he spat again as they both crept forward, but the Lincoln didn't give an inch. After a couple seconds the Hummer operator's medications must've completely run dry and he turned his hulking SUV into the Lincoln. Literally. His massive tire smashed up the mirror and passenger side door of the victim's car. It was astonishing. The Lincoln's driver didn't get out to assess the damage (most likely fearing for her/his life); both vehicles continued on the road for a bit until the Hummer sped off on a side street. Unbelievable.

Yeah, so, dumbass, I'm calling you out like I called the cops, you know-nothing human scum: Black Hummer driver with Connecticut license plate 259 RYR, you should be in jail.

Huh?

2004-04-30T15:50:00.000-04:00

How weird is this: A TV station owner is order its ABC affiliates not to broadcast a Nightline tribute to the fallen soldiers in Iraq because it alleges the tribute is motivated by anti-war liberal bias and meant to undermine operations in Iraq. John McCain blasts this refusal to broadcast as unpatriotic, while a lot of viewers in these markets are complaining.

Even less management

2004-04-30T12:45:00.000-04:00

This Slate article talks about how individuals who actively manage their own IRA investments grossly underperform the market.

Over the last 20 years, the stock market has averaged a 12 percent annual return. But according to a study by Dalbar Financial, individual mutual fund investors earned only about 4 percent. A survey by Vanguard finds participants in its 401(k) plans earn only about one-half the average—6 percent a year. It is almost impossible to believe, and unpleasant to contemplate, but practically all individual investors are below average.

According to the article, pension trustees behave more rationally in managing investments because they're more risk averse, more likely to admit their mistakes and cut their losses with perennial loser stocks, etc. Individual investors tend to trade too much, which tends to reduce returns.

But here's the weird part about the article--it heralds pension trustees who "achieve results that are about 50 percent better than those achieved by individual investors." But is that something to be impressed by? Let's do some math: 150 percent of 4 percent return is 6 percent return; 150 percent of the average return of the typical Vanguard individual investor (who is apparently more astute than other individual investors) would only get about 9 percent annual returns by turning over management to a trustee. Nine percent returns compared to 12 percent market returns?

A trustee that manages a pension plan with annual returns of 9 percent while the market returns 12 percent is arguably in breach of fiduciary duty. As my trusts & estates professor repeatedly emphasized, why pay a professional to underperform the market when there are (essentially unmanaged) index funds that guarantee the market return?

2004-04-29T23:44:00.000-04:00

AWOL leads to baseball

Apparently, N-Dawgg and I are one-trick dogs: without politics to argue about (because we're both suffering from Bush-Kerry-fatigue), we apparently have nothing remotely interesting to post. I suppose I could give you daily updates about the Anaheim Angels, but I think baseball-hater N-Dawgg would banish me. But a few more postless days, and it'll be all baseball, all the time. Yes, that is a threat.

2004-04-21T16:19:00.000-04:00

Slugging percentage

- Slugging percentage = Total Bases/At Bats = [Hits + 2B + (3B x 2) + (HR x 3)]/AB
- Walking someone every at bat is the equivalent of a slugging percentage of 1.0 (i.e., 1 base/"at bat")
- Barry Bonds has a slugging percentage of 1.378.
- If he keeps this up for a few more games, a rational manager should walk him every time--and thus give up fewer total bases to Bonds.

On a side note, he's also hitting .514 with an on-base percentage of .673. In the one official at-bat he had last night, he homered. He was walked in three other at bats.

2004-04-21T15:30:00.000-04:00

Bad advice

The Supreme Court and sports! The NFL draft is this weekend, and it looks like this will go down to the wire. Maurice Clarett, who filed the antitrust suit against the NFL challenging its rule that a player must be at least three years out of high school (the no-LeBron-or-Carmelo-rule), really has nothing to lose since he was suspended from Ohio State for improperly accepting gifts then lying about it. His collegiate career is over. Clarett won in district court. Mike Williams, the standout sophomore receiver at USC, also declared for the draft after the no-Lebron rule was invalidated. But he didn't stop there--he signed an agent--a big no-no if you want to maintain NCAA eligibility (another rule). Earlier this week, the 2nd Circuit stayed the district court's ruling. So, Williams has been left out to dry--for the moment. He's out of the NFL draft--for now. And he can't easily go back to USC--pending an appeal to the NFL. Oops.

2004-04-20T10:50:00.000-04:00

Cornhusking

A great ESPN article here covers the radical changes in L-town this spring.

The Lincoln Journal Star and Omaha World-Herald had considerably more coverage.

Oh, also, a beloved liberal ex-governor passed away on Monday.

2004-04-18T23:50:00.000-04:00

N-Dawgg displays signs of TV addiction

Although Wheat Thin was all about Kwame, I never really got caught up in the Apprentice hype. But that hype coupled with a viewing of High Fidelity last night inspired me to share the Top 5 reality shows of all time:

1. Real World San Francisco. Pedro, Puck, etc. The reality show genre peaked early.
2. Newlyweds. Good, clean fun. Adjusting to married life with a sizeable bank account.
3. Osbournes. The first season especially. Hilariously outrageous yet scarily familiar.
4. Real World Las Vegas. Pure craziness. New lows sucked me in.
5. Real World New Orleans. Another wacky town and another wacky group. (It's always more fun with a Mormon.)

Honorable mentions: American Chopper, Trading Spaces, Real World Chicago, Queer Eye for the Straight Guy, that ESPN show with the Streetballers, others?

2004-04-11T00:13:00.000-04:00

Litigiousness rating

The NYT has an article about a blacklist for renters.

[R]enters who have previously tangled with landlords are finding themselves effectively banned from future rentals. The advocates blame services that trawl through court records, charging landlords $6.99 to $50 a search to identify problem renters.

A while back, the NYT had a separate article about a similar list for patients who sued physicians for malpractice. That list was subsequently taken down after bad publicity from the press.

2004-04-11T00:02:00.000-04:00

Rice in '08?

Is it just me or are press outlets like CNN and MSNBC using the most unflattering, scary-looking pictures of Condoleezza Rice they can find? Or is she just not photogenic? This widely circulated one has to be the worst. You'd think that there must be a file photo of her looking serious and forceful yet somewhat pleasant.

2004-04-08T23:54:00.000-04:00

Steamed Rice, etc.

All right, RIAA! Raise those prices! We'll love you even more.

Yeah, um, ouch.

Dude, sweet.

What I want to know is how Jim Bob found time to run for the Senate? (Also, where can I procure a copy of that catchy tune, "Won't You Please Vote For My Daddy?")

Okay, so I gave up TV for Lent and didn't get to watch Condoleezza Rice's testimony, but it didn't sound real great--for Bush, I mean. My fave accounts: Kaplan for Slate, Saletan for Slate, Fineman (!) for MSNBC, and Von Drehle (?) for the Post. The victims' families' take. Clarke's take. Finally, some fella named Bill testified today, too.

So, what do y'all think about the draft? Is it comin' to get us able-bodied men? Is it already here?

2004-04-08T01:12:00.000-04:00

Teachers strike back

This article reports on computer software that detects plagiarism. I wonder if these programs will eventually be a standard tool in word processing programs. Then, you could check yourself!

2004-04-06T22:55:00.000-04:00

Irony

TNR on the government's argument in the Pledge of Allegiance case: "[W]hat kind of friendship for religion is it that insists that the words "under God" have no religious connotation?"

2004-04-06T22:24:00.000-04:00

(If I stop blogging, do I still exist?)

Square wheels on a bike? It works!

As JSK says, "classic Slate."

Here's a lengthy review of my latest item of lust.

It's about time for me to link to The Sports Guy again (because he is both funny and humorous).

I haven't been able to find a copy of this hot book at my Barnes & Noble for some reason.

Yeah, yeah, Bush lies and is generally incompetent and all that, but at least you don't live in Turkmenistan.

(For those of us who know that the "d" is lowercase): a somewhat odd article in Newsweek.

Moron population in Oregon: 741.

An abortion column worth reading (Nicholas Kristof).

David Brooks--who is growing less interesting and more wingnut-conservative-lockstep-with-Bush by the second over at the N.Y. Times editorial page--had another one of his light, poppy socio-cultural observation pieces in the Magazine last week. This after his "research methods" were shellacked by a Philly News reporter.

So Iraq seems to be going well. I always knew a violent U.S. invasion would inspire every Iraqi to sing us a happy song. It's a good way to approach the complex situation in the Middle East. At least there we aren't inciting more Islamist terrorists in Iraq as we speak or anything. Even if things DID get nasty--hard to imagine, I know--we're gonna be out of there by June 30 anhoo. So yippee for us! Then we'll protect ourselves with the Fail-Safe Missile Defense System. And we'll frisk crazy-dangerous liberal U.S. citizens more and more.

By the way, I've been working on a Kerry vice presidential post for, oh, a couple months or so. It's getting to the point where I'm just going to post it in all its sentence fragment glory just so you can hear my thoughts on such exciting possibilities as Dick Gephardt (or John McCain).

2004-04-02T01:48:00.000-05:00

Off the beaten path...

...of NYT, WP, CNN, LAT and Slate. Articles from Wired, the New Yorker, and the Economist.

2004-03-31T21:04:00.000-05:00

Unlikely bedfellows

Despite Clarke's protestations, MoveOn.org has put up new ads targeting President Bush that feature Clarke's voice and testimony. This makes me uncomfortable for several reasons. First, I'm not sure I'll ever be comfortable with PACs and 527 groups that funnel large amounts of money into advertising--even if it is to offset Bush's election warchest. Second, the MoveOn.org ad undermines Clarke's credibility as a nonpartisan (but then again, maybe that's already eroding). But most importantly, Clarke is not what you'd call a left-leaning anti-war activist--in fact, some of his tactics, while perhaps effective, are pretty controversial. No one can say he's too weak on security--in fact, it's more likely that he's quite the opposite. He's a strong defender of the Patriot Act--although he criticizes Ashcroft as "persuad[ing] much of the country that the needed reforms of the Patriot Act were actually the beginning of fascism.'' Safe to say, he's probably not a member of the ACLU. Anyway, there are reasons to be wary.

2004-03-24T20:52:00.000-05:00

Underdog Day

Two impressive performances--one before the Supreme Court, the other before the September 11 Commission--by two men taking on the establishment. But Michael Newdow's self-representation in the Pledge of Allegiance case seems to have been overshadowed by Richard Clarke's bombshell testimony of before the September 11 Commission. After watching clips of Clarke's testimony and his response to attacks on his credibility, I came away thinking that this man may personally take on the Bush Administration and win. He exudes credibility like no other person in the public spotlight.

2004-03-23T16:03:00.000-05:00

Senators among us

Just to let you know how law school encourages true nerditity, a couple weeks ago JSK and I played a "game" where we attempted to name all the senators and got 95 (uh...out of 100). Fun stuff.

Senators I'm liking more:
JSK-supported John McCain
Chuck Hagel
(see also gay marriage amendment)

Senators I'm liking less:
Joe Lieberman
JCS-defended Zell Miller (is it really possible to like him less?)

2004-03-16T10:35:00.000-05:00

And Then There Were Two...
The Most Reverend Al Sharpton finally bowed out of the race yesterday.

And so it begins. The Final Showdown: Kucinich vs. Kerry. Who will emerge victorious?

Update: It may be a little bit late for this, but a new way to judge the presidential candidates has just come to my attention: their hotel bills. Now if we only could get these itemized...

2004-03-11T19:54:00.000-05:00

Watch and learn

Opposition South Korean legislators are moving to impeach President Roh for a breach of election law (failing to maintain presidential neutrality and campaigning for (gasp!) members of his own party) and "incompetence."

Apparently, South Korean politicians have been paying attention to American politics. As this Slate piece notes, his political opponents seem to be using the impeachment power as an election strategy. (On a side note, the article also mentions that Roh's favorite TV program is The West Wing. I don't think he speaks English, so the show must be either dubbed or subtitled.)

The irony of this is that of the six or so presidents in South Korea's political history, which is rife with corruption and brutality, none were impeached during their terms. But several of them (two or three, I think) were convicted of crimes and sent to prison after their terms. Good to see that these legislators are using the impeachment power wisely in threatening political and economic stability to deal some relatively minor problems. I wonder where they got that idea?

Update: Roh is more Clinton than Bartlett.... he was impeached. The once-promsing presidency of this former labor lawyer falls to a new low.

2004-03-10T11:08:00.000-05:00

News from the File-Sharing Front

Most of you have probably heard of DJ Dangermouse's Grey Album by now. It is a fusion of the vocals and music from The Beatles' White Album and the vocals and beat of Jay-Z's Black Album. Jay-Z loves it, but EMI, who owns the White Album, ordered Dangermouse to cease and desist his production and distribution of the Grey Album. He complied but his cause was taken up by DownhillBattle.org, who organized an online outburst of civil disobedience dubbed "Grey Tuesday", where tens of thousands (GreyTuesday.org says 100,000) of young hoodlums downloaded the album on February 24.

Bit-By-Bit
There seems to be a shiver of excitement in every Techie Neotopian web hangout that I've visited to this desktop sit-in. Even Slate referenced it while discussing the landmark years of revolution like 1968. It will certainly be interesting to see if this kind of thing continues. One thing is certain: the big winner here is Jay-Z, who liked the Grey Album so much that he made a vocals only edit of his Black Album so that others can mess with it.

Fighting for the freedom to trade large files of entertaining content for little or no money doesn't exactly have the ring of Righteous Class Warfare or Gandhi's Salt-March to me, but, hey, who can resist the hard-driving rap hardcore of Jay-Z over the soft voice of John Lennon singing "Julia" (if you need the Grey Album just let me know...)?

The Electronic Freedom Foundation gives their legal analysis of this here. And MTV.

2004-03-04T14:37:00.000-05:00

Inside the Court

If you haven't read coverage of the release of Justice Blackmun's private papers, you're missing out. The NYT and NPR (full transcripts here) had exclusive sneak-peaks. Here's another NYT piece about what the Blackmun papers reveal about the other justices. The NPR transcripts are quite revealing and at times entertaining.

From NPR's Nina Totenberg:

Justice John Paul Stevens passed on to his colleagues a satire on the Court's decision allowing the U.S. Government to kidnap a Mexican doctor allegedly involved in a murder conspiracy in Mexico and fly him to the U.S. for trial. The satire was in the form of a fake newspaper article that began, "in a surprise move today the Mexican Government seized a U.S. official and flew him to Mexico for trial. The defendant was identified as W. Rehnquist, and is reported to be a member of the U.S. Supreme Court. Rehnquist was attending a conference on treaty obligations "...when he was seized..." and, "charged with abetting the kidnapping of a Mexican doctor.... His execution is scheduled for Thursday morning at 5 a.m."

On a related noted, thanks to N-Dawgg inside connections, we attended oral arguments for two cases at the Supreme Court on Tuesday. The experience was fantastic. Perhaps he'll share some of his thoughts on the experience.

2004-03-04T11:46:00.000-05:00

Pay next Tuesday, hamburger today

TNR points out how (surprise!) California soundly rejected the one proposition that could have helped reduce its deficit--the proposition making it easier to raise taxes. In addition to the $15 billion debt to restructure current debt (estimated cost to pay off: a LOT more than that), California voters also approved a $12.3 billion bond to improve schools (estimated cost to pay off: $24.7 billion). So, let's get this straight: a state that is already billions in debt just took on billions more in debt.

At least the state's credit rating has stabilized--for now.

2004-03-03T16:25:00.000-05:00

Apples and more apples

The politics of gay marriage are oh-so complicated. Gay marriage, civil unions, or nothing? Federal constitutional amendment, federal law, state constitutional amendment, or state law? Civil disobedience or civil disorder in SF? Support, not support but not oppose, or oppose?

We need a spreadsheet to keep track of the differences! (Maybe this is why John Kerry is unclear on John Kerry's position on the issue.)

And, this WP op-ed recognizes this unsettling fact:

[I]n explaining the president's position, White House spokesman Scott McClellan insisted that while Bush backed the amendment, he would also support the rights of states to provide various partnership benefits, including civil unions. Though the news emphasis has been on the former, the practical consequences of the latter are huge.

Until recently, that position -- that states should allow partnership benefits such as insurance and health care -- was considered extreme. It wasn't too long ago that Howard Dean was thought unelectable because he signed Vermont's civil union law, which in effect provided a full slate of partnership benefits.

Amazingly, Bush has now said he can live with that, which means his position is not all that different from that of John Kerry or John Edwards. All three say states should be allowed to have civil unions. All three say they oppose gay marriage. The main difference is that the Democrats want to ban gay marriage by statute and Bush wants to ban it by constitutional amendment.

Will the voters be able to sort everything out by November? Oh, one more thing: John Kerry, who opposes gay marriage as a matter of state law, has been outflanked by a California Republican on the issue! Schwarzenegger "would not object if state law were changed to allow gay marriage." Both strongly oppose a federal constitutional amendment.

One final note: In order to avoid being confused with another person who shares the initials JK, I've added another initial.

2004-03-02T21:01:00.000-05:00

The next President of the United States

John Kerry has no flaws and is the best person for the job.

That's my story and I'm stickin' to it.

2004-02-26T16:47:00.000-05:00

This ain't a dictionary

A thought: Bush expressed support for an unspecified federal marriage amendment. The current Musgrave Hate Amendment seems to outlaw gay marriages as well as other "civil union" arrangements (debatable, perhaps, as JK pointed out, but I tend to agree with Prof. Balkin ). This is perhaps one reason why 34 Senators have come out against it, including Chuck Hagel (R-NE)! Basically, that version of the FMA would ensconce bigotry into the constitution. The public may not be pro-gay marriage, but they/we are pro-civil rights. On this, Americans tend toward tolerance rather than outright bigotry. Which is why I predict this amendment will not make it into the Constitution, simple as that.

Dubya kinda seems to understand this, saying in his statement, "The amendment should fully protect marriage, while leaving the state legislatures free to make their own choices in defining legal arrangements other than marriage." This is essentially what Democratic presidential candidates have said, "We'll leave it up to the states" (though thankfully none of them supports the FMA, of course Kerry is playing both sides here). So maybe Bush isn't supporting the Musgrave Hate Amendment; instead, he's hoping for a "moderate" version which would allow states to set up civil unions or something. But if that's what is going on, it's a case of amending the constitution for semantic purposes. Same-sex couples could potentially reap every benefit of heterosexual marriage except one: the right to call their relationship a "marriage."

2004-02-25T11:30:00.000-05:00

Atrios has the best campaign slogan for Bush/Cheney 2004 I've seen yet:

Don't Switch Horsemen Mid-Apocalypse

2004-02-23T19:20:00.000-05:00

Civil disobedience or civil disorder?

Here's the most persuasive argument I've seen against the recent actions of [the State of] San Francisco.

Update: a bunch of polls on the topic in one place!

2004-02-22T10:44:00.000-05:00

A New Nadir

To paraphrase James Carville, Nader's 2000 campaign was perhaps the most destructive act of masturbation in U.S. political history. And now, not to be deterred by having delivered the White House to Bush, or by his lack of party and support, he's back. What a surprise!

It's good to see that there will always be someone on the lunatic fringe to torpedo the party whenever the Democrats begin to get their act together and mount an opposition.