Duck Season

"At least 80" candidates have qualified for the California gubernatorial recall election.

Holly McPeak and her partner seek revenge against Misty May and her partner for a defeat last week on the Women's Pro Volleyball tour. All the action you can want right now on NBC. (Which, thankfully, stands for "no boy contestants.")

Sportscenter does segments for Fantasy leagues now? And why, with all of their talent people, wasn't their analysis any less shallow or vapid than your average fantasy magazine? Being wrong never prevented the NY Times from making bold football predictions, so lets have Ron Jaworski lead an entire show on draft analysis, instead of a dumb segment narrated by the disembodied voice.

I'm not exactly sure this has become a "big deal." Granted there was no sports radio yesterday so it's hard to say how the New England sports conscience feels (and if we're obscessing), but I saw Sportscenter yesterday morning and just now, and the "homo" comment was never mentioned, let alone developed into its own segment.

A Shockey story was done this morning, but it wasn't a piece focused on his comments (although one of the talking heads on Sportscenter did mention a Bill Parcells controversey and that Shockey had previously "popped-off about gays" on the Howard Stern Show), it was focused on Shockey and whether or not his public fame was turning into infamy. The short segment covered his on the field showmanship, the incident where he threw something at a child in the stands, and a recent interview in Maxim (iirc segment ended 10 mins ago... I type slow) where he asked women to write him about their sexual fantasies, and don't forget to include a picture.

I think this latest comment just serves to push Shockey from becomming the "male Anna Kournikova" his handlers thought he could be (in terms of earnings potential through mainstream endorsements), and solidifies his image as just a major league a-hole.

And if Shockey is grabbing people's genitals in a pig-pile, then, well, I think somoeone ought to edumecate Jeremy about what exactly constitutes homosexual behavior.

Today's e-mail from the Kerry campaign:

Dear Friend,

George W. Bush is in Texas right now! We need your help to send George W. Bush back to Texas on election day -- for good.

We need you to help us raise $100 dollars for each of the 1,446 miles between the White House and the Bush ranch in Crawford, Texas by Friday, August 15th. We need your help! America needs a President who will work for us. (emphasis added) President Bush has lost three million jobs and keeps telling us that under his economic plan, tax breaks for the wealthy will "trickle-down". Let's show the Republican Party that we are all tired of being trickled on by George W. Bush.

John, how can I believe that you'll be a President who will work for us, when you aren't even a senator who will work for us?

John Derybshire has all the latest news from Mongolia over in 'The Corner':

Just two items from Mongolia. (Hey, don't say we don't keep you well-informed.) First, the BBC reports that Christianity is spreading like wildfire among the yurts (You need to read down a bit to get to the stuff about Christianity.) No news on whether they are ordaining any gay bishops, though. Second, my Mongolia Guy (no kidding) tells me that Mongolia has soldiers in Iraq with the US. He adds: "I've always wondered how they are seen, seeing as how 'they're just like the Mongols' is always the worst thing Arab opponents can say against the US." {Mesopotamia endured a very nasty ravage by Genghis & his lads back in the 13th century.)

Alienation of Marriage: Another man stole his wife's heart, so Albert Edwin Holcombe Jr. sued. A jury says his broken heart is worth $175,000.

These are just terrible laws! They don't protect the sanctity of marriage, they feed into our culture of victimization, and they reduce the seduced spouse to the position of so much property to be replaced. To say that a complete stranger can ruin just any relationship is an absurdity. You would think that an adult would understand that cheating is a symptom of a relationship in trouble, not the cause.

Fighting for their right to get freaky in 2004:

ATHENS, Greece -- Athens' prostitutes have marched in the streets, slept on sidewalks in protest and even sued local authorities.


But it seems no amount of opposition will stop Athens from cracking down on the sex trade before the 2004 Olympics.


The city's municipal council is pushing to enforce a widely ignored 1999 law that sharply regulates prostitution, which is legal in Greece only in government-approved brothels.

So the prostitutes are unhappy because the government is shutting down bordello's that aren't up to code, thus forcing them to peddle their wares on the street? So why aren't the angry that their work places aren't being maintained? And what kind of regulation aren't these bordellos living up to? Do the clocks run too fast, or are the sheets not changed often enough? Do they not have handicap access? I mean, it's a Bordello for crying out loud! (Then again, maybe thats the problem. It'd be really, uh, distribuing, to be able to hear that "business activity" from the street. There needs to be a surchage for extra insulation and soundproof windows.) My question still remains, how do you regulate out the disgusting factor?

You can't beat the Greeks when it comes to preserving the integrity of their children, thou shall not pay for nookie within "660 feet of churches, schools and youth centers and other civic institutions."

(From ESPN.com.)

Balloon Juice, in a long post about Democratic fundraising and double standards, quotes from a story from the Washington Post three months ago:

Democrats are kicking off a backdoor way of financing their 2004 congressional campaigns today with the very type of unlimited donations from corporations, unions, and individuals that many party leaders had vowed to flush from the political system.

The strategy involves setting up two new groups unmistakably aligned with the Democratic Party's longstanding campaign organizations for the House and Senate. Technically, the two groups are not arms of the Democratic Party, a key distinction, because the nation's new campaign finance law bars lawmakers from soliciting ''soft money,'' the unlimited money that politicians still crave.

House minority leader Nancy Pelosi, Democrat of California, and minority whip Steny Hoyer, Democrat of Maryland, will headline a fund-raising event tonight at the Hotel George for a new group called the New House PAC.

Tonight, the group will raise ''hard money,'' a limited, regulated type of donation that lawmakers can legally solicit. But the group plans to ask donors for soft money later this year and to serve as a sort of shadow campaign committee for the Democratic Party, according to sources familiar with the effort.

Where's the outrage?

Apparently Jeremy Shockey called Bill Parcells a "homo". Shockey denies it, and nobody's commenting.

Really, who cares? This is football, not the local kumbaya meeting. Players call each other gay slurs and worse all the time. This is a sport where players regularly try to inflict pain upon their opponents by grabbing their genitals while they're in a tackling pile, and we're supposed to be worked up about this?

This is some intriguing stuff. Just saw some guy bluffed out of a winning hand by another with an absolute nothing hand. Which leads me to the first rule of bluffing:

Bluffing is much more effective if you don't speak good English.

POSTSCRIPT As I was typing this, the aforementioned bluffer, Scotty Ngyuen, just got eliminated from the tournament on a hand his opponent had about a 5% chance of winning before the last card. Them's the breaks, I guess.

Matt Yglesias reports that he "got an e-mail from the unofficial Wesley Clark campaign hinting that an announcement of his candidacy may be coming soon and asking for an endorsement."

I've earlier stated my belief that Clark has almost no chance of winning the Democratic primary. What I don't get is why so many people seem to think that of all the Democratic candidiates he would have the best chance of beating Bush, and even be favored over George Bush to win the presidency. The concensus among these people seem to be that since Clark was a general, that would erase the Democrat's gap on national security, even though Clark wasn't exactly in favor of going into Iraq.

This attitude underscores the lack of seriousness on the part of some Democrats on national security, and a misunderstanding of how the average American feels about national security. They seem to believe that those who are hesitant to vote for a Democrat for president in the next election because of this issue will vote for Clark simply because he's a general and can tell good war stories. Americans give Bush and the Republicans an edge in this issue not because Bush talks tough and looks good riding shotgun on a jet, but because they believe what Bush is doing is making America safer. One can argue whether Bush's policies do make America safer, but we won't be having that debate any time soon if a non-insignificant portion of the opposition think they can sweep the issue away by nominating a war hero so they can get back to talking about the important issues. Until this faction gets a clue, Americans will continue to perceive Democrats as weak on national security.

The offensive statistics may be similar, but one guy plays center field, while the other can barely play first base. I know who I'd take.

Jane Galt on global warming:

You know what the problem with debates like the debate over global warming is? It's that the journalists writing about it, in general, seem to have absolutely no clue as to how one goes about evaluating scientific claims. They don't understand about levels of confidence, they don't have the faintest clue how models work and how seriously one can take various forms of models, and they seem to be unaware that most scientists come to believe that whatever they are working on is the most pressing, consequential thing happening on the planet.

***

While my limited research shows that it is indeed the consensus of the scientific community that global warming is real, there is no consensus about its extent and reach, a distinction that appears entirely lost on the majority of journalists who cover it. In other words, the fact that the scientific community believes it is happening does not mean that they endorse the wild doomsday scenarios promulgated by various environmental groups, and using their "consensus" to support such claims is bad journalism.

***

...we are all prone to think that we are right. Scientists advocating aggressive models of warming may be right -- or they may be overconfident. A look at the history of downward revisions in warming projections is educational on that score. According to journalists, the scientists were every bit as certain about projections that were as much as 4 degrees celcius higher, just a short time ago. A little humility about the much-vaunted scientific consensus is in order.

I'd also note that the majority of journalists I know who believe that global warming is settled science believe thusly because -- they have heard it from other journalists. Few of whom were out building climate models in their spare time.

Which is not to say that global warming isn't happening, or that we shouldn't do something about it. But the level of superstition and ignorance surrounding the debate is appalling. People on both sides should hold off on the ridicule and contempt until they're sure that their own understanding of the science is rock solid.

There were several studies contradicting the global warming doomsday scenarios released within the last year that managed to slip under the radar of the media. More on this later.

UPDATE is here. Hopefully the link works (it's the 8/11 9:08pm post).

A bunch of Democratic rich guys led by George Soros plan to spend $75 million in an effort to defeat George Bush.

I await this to be denounced by proponents of campaign finance reform.

Godzilla vs. Millarthra

Millar: .287 BA, 18 HRs, 69 RBI, 60 Runs, .856 OPS
Matsui: .295 BA, 13 HRs, 81 RBI, 60 Runs, .807 OPS

Lifted directly from the blog with the greatest URL ever.

Lieberman blasts Bush over the security fence/wall issue:

In an e-mail message sent Tuesday night to Jewish supporters, Lieberman wrote that he was "stunned" to learn of Bush's threats to withdraw loan guarantees if Israel does not stop construction of the fence, which Israel says it needs to stop terrorism. Lieberman also suggested that Bush is not a true friend of Israel, and compared Bush to his father, whose stances toward Israel were often highly unpopular in the Jewish community.

"We all thought this kind of heavy-handed pressure tactic went out the window when the first President Bush left the White House," Lieberman wrote. "That's what George W. told us -- he seemed to be a true friend of Israel. But making threats is no way to treat a friend. The Israeli people have the right to defend themselves from terrorism and to decide what's necessary to do that. And it's wrong to force them to choose between their security and our support. As President, I won't make a habit of bullying our allies -- especially Israel."

From Joe's website.

Fox News Channel has announced that it will host two primetime Democratic debates featuring all 9 candidates. More over at Yahoo! News.

Today Only: Why Fox News is so compelling to watch.

Peter Ueberroth, former baseball commissioner who ran the 1984 Summer Olympics, may run for governor in California. Robert Musil predicts that all the major Republican candidates, including Ueborroth, will drop out and endorse Arnold, and big trouble for Davis.

Last night's line: P. Martinez (W, 8-2) 9 IP 10 H 2 R 1 ER 1 BB 11 SO 0 HR 128-91 Pitches/Strikes

Pedro pitched his first complete game of this season to secure a 4-2 victory over the Anaheim Angles.

My favorite Pedro story begins in September, 2001. Pedro defeated the New York Yankees and ended a personal five game winless streak against the Yankees. After the game Pedro decalred that he was "starting to hate talking about the Yankees. It's getting kind of old. I don't believe in damn curses. Wake up the damn Bambino and have me face him. Maybe I'll drill him in the ass, pardon the word."

Ten months and one career threatening injury later, Pedro celebrated his first victory since that Yankee game by declaring "I believe in God. I don't believe in curses."

After the final strike of last night's game Pedro pointed towards God and then celebrated with his teamates. The game was of a flashback to that Pedro. That performance after the game shows why Pedro is as beloved in Boston for his heart as he is for his pitching accomplishments. How could you not love a guy who takes baseball so seriously he felt it a threat to his religion? We love Pedro because he cares as much about the Red Sox as we do. Maybe even more.

Remember California's Lt. Governor Cruz Bustamante? Mickey Kaus reports that Cruz is expected to declare his candidacy for governor tommorow.

Turns out that your momma is more likely to be one of her majesty's loyal subjects than a german citizen. A bored google query from work last night found the following statistics on obesity in the United Kingdom:

• "The number of people in England who are obese has tripled over the last twenty years. A National Audit Office (NAO) report, Tackling Obesity in England, presented to Parliament shows most adults are overweight, and one in five is obese." (link)
  
• Foot.com reports that 61% of all adults are overweight in America, while in the UK only 51% of adults are overweight. Russia is the first runner up with 54% of all adults having vodka-bellies, while beer, sausage, and pretzels have only caused 50% of all german adults to be overweight.
  
• The Organisation for Ecomonic Co-operation and Development reports that as of 1999, 30.9% of Americn adults are obese. First runner up is Mexico at 24.2% (a/o 2000), while the United Kingdom barely beats out Austria for third place with 22.0% (a/o 2001) of its adult population considered obese. (Information from page four of this .pdf file**, which was included as a source in this report)

** A critical footnote to this study: For most countries figures are based upon self-reported information instead of data from health care professionals. This is important to note because "obesity estimates arising from health examinations by professionals are generally higher and more reliable than those coming from self-reports in health interview surveys." Obesity was measured by determining a subjects Body Mass Index (and i'll grant you that BMI is far from a perfect measurement method), so any self-reported data can potentially be skewed by people giving their wrong height or weight. The data for the UK and USA was collected from health professionals. If self-reported data from the USA had been used, we would have had an adult obesity rate of only 17.9% for the year 2001.

It appears as if we have yet another popular myth destroyed. While America is clearly the global pudgy trend-setter, our dominance in this field is far from secure. So while the Euros wave their arms in disgust at the fat, lazy american, recognize that they're peddling stereotypes.

The same people also consider it common knowledge that the naked eye can confirm that gravity does much less work over in Europe, but how significant a difference is a mere 8% of the population? Does less than one additional overweight person out of 10, or 8 additional in a crowd of 100, really make that much of an impression on your eye? I sincerely doubt it.

Here's a fact from the OECD for the Atkin's people; Italy and her pasta based diet has the fifth lowest obesity rate listed, weighing in with only 8.6% of its adult population considered obese.

Lileks returns. Good stuff about Arnold, and a good banner too.

It's time to play Name The Quote:

The rules of the game are as follows. Of the following seven quotes there are two from Arnold Schwarzenegger, two from Georgy Russell, two from Howard Dean, and one from Ralph Nader. See if you can figure out which two belong to Arnold.

1. As part of a plan for healthier citizens the candidate would, in part, stress "[p]revention. Improving the use of preventive measures focused on critical issues affecting health smoking, obesity, substance abuse, communicable diseases (e.g. HIV, SARS), and violence and orchestrating private-public partnerships to promote healthy behavior and prevent illness."
   
   
2. "Money has undeniably corrupted our electoral process. Problems like energy dependence will never be creatively attacked unless we remove money from the equation. We need to strive for representative democracy, not settle for representative plutocracy (government by the wealthy). That a typical citizen might ascend to the governorship is a notion so ridiculously foreign to Californians, most believe it impossible. The only candidates with an outside chance of winning are increasingly those who succumb to special interests or those who spend millions of their own dollars."
   
   
3. "The biggest problem that we have is that California is being run now by special interests. All of the politicians are not anymore making the moves for the people, but for special interests and we have to stop that."
   
   
4. "If we are serious about improving... education... we must not forget that the single most important factor in how a child learns has less to do with the quality of the building, the computers or even the teachers. The most important predictor is the attitude in that child's home toward education. We must involve parents again; we must insist that they participate in their children's education; and we must make schools and school boards responsive to parents."
   
   
5. "We want to make sure children aren't left without any books. We want to make sure our children have the books, that they have a place in the castle. We want to make sure that their mothers have affordable day care. We want to make sure we give the older people the care that they need."
   
   
6. "Californians deserve a campaign that will practice taking the corrosive impact of special interest money out of politics at the same time that it preaches campaign finance reform."
   
   
7. "The truth is, even with the billions in painful cuts already made, California is unable to make the cuts necessary to truly balance the budget. This situation is not new; Republican Governor Pete Wilson faced similarly staggering budget problems when he took office over a decade ago. His solution was to not only cut spending, but to increase revenues by raising rates on the top tax bracket by about one percent." "He recognized what an impediment to economic recovery the budget crisis was, and stayed honest with Californians about the decisions that had to be made."
   

Arnold Quotes from SFGate.com, Georgy quotes from the Georgy for Governor website, Dean quotes from here and here, while the Nader quote is from here.

Who is the most popular liberal in America? Rudy Giuliani

Who is the second most popular liberal in America? Colin Powell

Who is the third most popular liberal in America? John McCain

Denver Nugget Nene Hilario changes his name to a single word, Nen.

I think this offically makes him the worst athlete ever with a single name.

UPDATE: Grrrr. It's "Nene", not "Nen". AP changes its story without noting that it's been changed.

Susanna Cornett laments the naming of public works after politicians.

Isn't it about time we start selling naming rights to private entities? We're going to end up with stupid names for our highways and tunnels anyway, so why not make a little money off it?

More government revenue without taxes, something for everyone, liberals and conservatives!

Slate Explainer details the administrations latest US attempt to stop the Israeli security fence, threatening the reduction of loan guarantees.

Chatterbox does a double-take on media bias, declaring conservatives to be much bigger brown-nosers than liberals:

Tomasky's findings are quite striking. The percentage of editorials in Tomasky's liberal sample that criticized Bush (67 percent) was 22 points less than the percentage of editorials in Tomasky's conservative sample that criticized Clinton (89 percent). Particularly dramatic are what Chatterbox will label the Praise Gap and the Self-Criticism Gap. The Praise Gap reflects the liberal papers' general reluctance to praise anyone, ideological friend or foe. Thus the liberal sample praised Clinton a mere 30 percent of the time while the conservative sample praised Bush 77 percent of the time. The Self-Criticism Gap shows that liberal papers are well able to criticize ideological friends while the conservative papers really aren't. The liberal sample criticized Clinton 30 percent of the time while the conservative sample criticized Bush a mere 7 percent of the time. The Wall Street Journal has a particularly strong aversion to self-criticism. Of the 40 Bush editorials Tomasky surveyed, only one criticized Bush. This was an editorial arguing against Bush's support for steel tariffs, which violated the editorial page's core principle of free trade but was discussed at the absurdly minimal length of 123 words.

Timothy Noah concludes, with the help of David Frum, that these results reflect the fact that liberals are loyal to causes, while conservatives are much more likely to be loyal to individuals. I believe what they actually represent is the difficulty of being a mainstream liberal these days. The Liberal Conscience of America has situated itself in such a position that it's very difficult for a democrat to be identified as liberal and hold a position of national significance. It's that old high school paradox, if being told that you're cool is proof that you're uncool, how do you know when you're cool? (I'm paraphrasing a Simpsons scene here, but for the life of me I can't recall the exact quote)

FNC keeps telling me that Howard Dean is crazy left-wing anti-war liberal, but wouldn't their core audience be interested to know Dean's position on gun control? Do Dean's liberal supports know that he swings right on this issue? And has anyone informed Gary Trudeau? (I'm ranting off-subject, aren't I?)

The real problem with the democratic party is that the term liberal has been aged and consumed by "progressive" bacterias to such an extent that it resembles a french camembert, taxing on the nose and tart in the mouth. The "progressives" have been allowed to define for the public what it means to be liberal while the Bush administration was left unopposed to redefine and capture The Center on foreign policy issues alone. The "liberal" party, like a fine cheese, is working for those of us who appreciate it (or who can convince themselves that they do). It has become an aquired taste generally unappealing to the masses, direly in need of a new recipe.

Democrats for National Security seems more concerned with sniping at Bush instead of working for, uh, national security.

Joe Lieberman advocates free trade and school vouchers amid booing from a hostile AFL-CIO crowd opposed to both.

Yahoo! News is reporting that Arnold Schwarzenegger has officially joined the California recall race. Ahnold announced his decision on an episode of The Tonight Show with Jay Leno which was taped this afternoon.

Now all I ask is that Ahnold and Gary Coleman hold a debate live on pay-per-view. Even better, they could include this blogs candidate, Georgy Russell, and make it a mud wrestling match.

Since I'm too poor to actually trade in this market, I'll monitor it, post interesting lines every week, and whine two years later that if I had invested in X and Y I would be rich.

stock:high bid-low ask

Gray Davis to survive December: 50-53
survive March: 32-35

Democratic primary
Dean 27-32
Edwards 8-10
Gephardt 7-8
Kerry 28-32
Lieberman 12-15

Bush reelection 64-67
Bush wins Massachusetts 22-27

Electoral votes if every state result was rightly predicted:
Bush 397, Democrat 141
(Dem. states CA 55, CT 7, HI 4, MD 10, MA 12, NJ 15, NY 31, RI 4, VT 3)

George Bush --> he bugs Gore
Albert Gore --> bar tree log
Ronald Wilson Reagan --> Insane Anglo Warlord
President Clinton of the USA --> to copulate he finds interns

Mark Kleiman thinks that the Iowa elections market shows that Bush is even money at reelection. The Iowa market, however, is probably not as accurate as a typical market should be because of two reasons. The market trades shares in pennies, and volume is very low, so one can't exactly make much money playing this market. Also, there are only three markets open to the public: presidential vote share, Democratic primary winner, and a market on interest rates. The existence of a Democratic primary market without one for Republicans may have the effect of increasing the percentage of investors who are Democrats. Given that no real money is at stake, the investors may be more likely to make investments based on their preferences and not their analysis, and since there are more Democrats, this could tilt the numbers against Bush.

A market with higher cost and volume might be more accurate. For example, tradesports.com has Bush shares at $64 for a $100 payout. The lowest the stock has been traded for the last 8 months (no available data before that) was $58. Since April, the stock has been holding constant at about the current amount of $64.

I'm talking about Gary Coleman as the next governor of California.

(Via Slings and Arrows)

The Comics Journal has an interesting theory on the future of Marvel Comics and comic property movies. I've felt the exact same way since I heard that someone had optioned a Namor flick, calling it an "underwater Star Wars." Marvel has some great properties, X2 and Spider-Man were huge box office hits and I believe Daredevil still could be, but someone has to tell Avi Arad that there's a fine line between comic characters with huge mainstream appeal and characters who're just going to bomb.

Namor is a definite bomb, as will be the Fantastic Four movie if it ever gets made. There's just no mass appeal for a mer-man, the son of an Antartic explorer and and the Queen of an underwater race of people, while the psuedo-comics science/suspension of disbelief it requires to follow a story about an ex-pilot, a scientist, his girl-friend and her younger brother who pilot a rocket into space, only to be bombarded by cosmic rays and be granted super-powers is too huge an obstacle to overcome with the public. Granted, Spider-Man and Daredevil have comic science origins, (and when will Marvel stop using that CGI DNA shot to explain that someone was changed?) but the beauty of these characters is the way they move on the movie screen, and the way their abilities are manipulated into a story. I've never heard anyone complain that they dislike 'The Matrix' because the character's powers are unbelievable. The FF are completely different story. All anyone is going to wonder is if "Mr. Fantastic can stretch his dinky also? And do you think The Thing is hard all over? I mean really all over."

Many thanks to fellow blogger Bryon Scott for his quite thorough list of anagrams for "real nut con free zone." While I didn't find what I was looking for, his message was great fun to read. Bryon "Jason Kidd never wanted me fired" Scott earns a bonus no-prize for being my first first e-mailer about the blog.

Luckily I bumped into Hei Lun on the train today (which explaining the so far slow-blogging, we were attemping that "real life" thing) and he explained that real nut con is an anagram of Her name. Rest assured that when it's my turn to mess around with the banner I won't chose anything quite so complicated as an anagram:

Alison: It's great of you to come over, Lisa. I really want us to be friends.
Lisa: You're a wonderful person.
Taylor: Hi, Lisa, I'm Alison's father, Professor Taylor. I've heard great things about you.
Lisa: Oh, really? I --
Taylor: Oh, don't be modest. I'm glad we have someone who can join us in our anagram game.
Alison: We take proper names and rearrange the letters to form a description of that person.
Taylor: Like, er...oh, I don't know, uh...Alec Guinness.
Alison: [thinks] Genuine class.
Taylor: Ho ho, very good. All right, Lisa, um...Jeremy Irons.
Lisa: [looks with consternation] Jeremy's...iron.
Taylor: Mm hmm, well that's...very good...for a first try. You know what? I have a ball. [pulls one from his pocket] Perhaps you'd like to bounce it?

"From a business perspective, it's [the Kobe trial] great for the NBA. It's reality television, people love train-wreck television and you hate to admit it, but that is the truth, that's the reality today."

Will increased ratings on opening night really offset the loss of Kobe's Sprite ad? The Kobe trial might be a goldmine for programs which cater to our celebrity obsessed culture, but there is nothing but loss for the NBA if Kobe Bryant is found guilty of sexual assault and sent to jail. That fact alone disproves Mark Cuban's statement.

Cuban should be fined because his comment is in incredibly poor taste. No business should express its enthusiasm for benefitting from the suffering of others. (Yes i'm still applying to law school in the fall, there's no need to point out the irony here.) What if an Amtrak spokesperson had come out on September 12 and declared "business looks good."

A defense of Justin Timberlake, who played in the aforementioned SARS concert:

OK, let's recap. Justin Timberlake, who's American, an actual star who is successful right now (as opposed to 20-30 years ago), in fact arguably one of the biggest pop stars in the world right now, takes time out of his tour to play a benefit for Canada's premier city, whose tourism industry is still reeling from a health scare, and for this he is greeted with boos and water bottles.

(Via Instapundit).

Arianna Huffington will run for governor in the California recall election. Mickey Kaus, who has been all over this saga, has this and more. I'm still for Georgy though.

UPDATE: As of now there are officially 102 candidates, not including Huffington. Guess my prediction of 35 was a bit off.

He makes a few great points talking to Dan Patrick on ESPN Sportscenter. Short term, it will increase ratings, just as it does for ESPN, CNN, et al. to assign reporters to Colorado and cover it extensively. Would it not be reasonable to suppose that the people who are interested in the case to also tune in and watch Lakers games when they're on the air?

Cuban also fires a preemptive shot against the media and puts Patrick on the defensive. Those in the media who condemn him for praising sensationalism have had no problems so far capitalizing on the sensationalism of the case and creating a media circus.

Also, once it's established that he at least has a case, why should he be silenced by the NBA? If it's okay for talk radio stations to discuss whether this will benefit Bryant in endorsements, why should an owner not have the right to express his opinion on whether this will benefit the league? We can agree that it was tackless and he probably shouldn't have said it, but fining him would be excess in censure. What would be the rationale for doing so? If what he said was debatably true, then the only rationales left would be either that he said something that should be left unsaid, or that it would hurt the image of the league. I have little sympathy for the former rationale because that would in effect limit speech to what is popular and politically correct.

The rationale for fining him because he hurt the league's image seems valid, until we realize that this is just a cover for punishing him for saying something that people don't agree with. Imagine this scenario: the NFL announced that it's their official position that the league no longer have a problem with the lack of minority hires in the coaching ranks, and removes all requirements for interviewing at least one minority candidate for head coaches. Dan Rooney, former president of the Pittsburgh Steelers and a long time advocate for minority hires, publicly disagreed and said that overall the NFL still discriminates against minorities. Would anyone approve if the NFL fines Rooney for hurting the image of the league? The question answers itself and reveals that support for fining Cuban for hurting the league's image is only a proxy for supporting fining him for saying something one does not agree with.

80s brilliance earns Bon Jovi the right to be in the same class as Bruce and U2

uh, no

The Stones

Any band that appeared on 90210 post-Brenda is automatically disqualified.

the Red Hot Chili Peppers if you can convince Flea to keep his clothes on

That'll play to the family crowd.

Cold Play is out there touring

Maybe they can play with the Dixie Chicks and John Cougar Mellencamp.

Evanescence must have another song

I have the CD; they don't have another song.

While Jennifer Garner isn't a bad choice for Catwoman, she already has her talent on display as Elektra. Garner was supposedly interested in an Elektra solo flic, but Daredevil's mediocre success coupled with The Hulk's pseudo-bomb has stopped a lot of formerly hot comic-property rumors dead in their tracks.

So how did they get Berry for the part?

Another choice could have been Eliza Dushku.

Reverand V. Gene Robinson, the openly gay reverand, was elected as a bishop of the Episcopal church despite fears this issue could split the church. FNC has more on this story.

Let's not hate on Bon Jovi. Bon Jovi is bad. Bon Jovi is real man's music... if you're from the 80s. Their TV audience and 80s brilliance earns Bon Jovi the right to be in the same class as Bruce and U2 for an event of this nature.

There are better choices for the kick-off show, there have to be. The Stones, the Red Hot Chili Peppers if you can convince Flea to keep his clothes on, I think Cold Play is out there touring, Evanescence must have another song, or even one of those Emo bands that're so popular right now. Anyone but Mary J. Blige.

While Jennifer Garner isn't a bad choice for Catwoman, she already has her talent on display as Elektra. Garner was supposedly interested in an Elektra solo flic, but Daredevil's mediocre success coupled with The Hulk's pseudo-bomb has stopped a lot of formerly hot comic-property rumors dead in their tracks.

I saw a commercial promoting NFL opening day yesterday during preseason football, which went something like "Watch Britney, Mary J. Blige, Aretha Franklin on the pre-game show, blah, blah, blah" and then the last three seconds "plus Redskins versus Jets". I normally don't mind sports leagues reaching out to casual fans, but this is ridiculous.

As for the curious selection of performers, it's not as if it's any worse than Bon Jovi last year. There really isn't any significantly better choice other than Springsteen or U2. They have to keep the family audience in mind, and there's not really a huge overlap in music palatable to families and to young males.

And shouldn't Jennifer Garner be Catwoman?

Senator Norm Coleman of Minnesota (R) has requested that the RIAA release copies of the more than 900 subpoenas issued against file-sharers. Coleman's primary concern is that innocent by-standers are being targeted for prosecution:

"The industry has legitimate concerns about copyright infringement," Coleman said in a statement. "We are dealing with stealing recording artists' songs and the industry's profits. ... Yet, the industry seems to have adopted a 'shotgun' approach that could potentially cause injury and harm to innocent people who may have simply been victims of circumstance or [who don't know] the rules related to digital sharing of files."

****

The senator's action was spurred in part, he said, by media reports of the RIAA targeting family members and roommates whose computers were unwittingly used to share files, and a grandparent who is facing $45 million in penalties for downloading his "oldies favorites."

As I predicted, cable companies are fighting back:

On Wednesday, the country's largest provider of DSL Internet service, SBC Communications, filed suit against the RIAA in San Francisco's Federal District Court. "We think their misapplication of the DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) subpoena powers in this case pose a serious threat to the privacy of our customers," said SBC spokesperson Larry Meyer, whose company has nearly 3 million DSL subscribers.

(From MTV.com)

Halle Berry is set to dive into the role of Cat Woman while Britney Spears will perform two new songs for this year's NFL Kick-off Weekend.

I'm not sure which I bothers me more, that Halle Berry is replacing Ashley Judd as Catwoman, or that the NFL brain trust think Mary J. Blige and Arethra Franklin are performers anyone wants to see on the NFL Kick-off Show. Hello Paul Tagliabue, if you're not going to book acts that your core young male audience is going to want to listen to, at least book some acts (like Spears) that we will want to watch. Then again, if Paul can get Ashley in a tight leather suit on stage for Kick-off Weekend, all will be forgiven.

Mark Cuban has really outdone himself this time: "From a business perspective, it's [the Kobe trial] great for the NBA. It's reality television, people love train-wreck television and you hate to admit it, but that is the truth, that's the reality today,"

Luckily, Big Poppa Stern won't have none of that: "Any suggestion that there will be some economic or promotional benefit to the NBA arising from the charge pending against Kobe Bryant is both misinformed and unseemly," Stern said in a statement. "That idea does not reflect the views of the NBA, NBA owners generally, or others associated with our sport."

Mark Cuban deserves to be fined by the NBA for his comments. Plus, i'm sure his favorite charity could use the matching contribution.

From ESPN.com

Michele Catalano, a Yankees fan, suggests celebrating Ted Williams's birthday August 30:

We can call it Holiday on Ice.

The kids can play freeze tag, the adults can have frozen drinks and then we can all beat up a pinata shaped like Ted's son John Henry. Of course, the pinata is filled with ice cubes.

She also has a guest column at Fox Sports New England.

This reminds me of the joke in Seinfeld where it took a person his whole life to move from the person selling tickets in a movie theater twelve inches over to the person taking the ticket.

What is an anagram of Real Nut Con-free zone?

It's a really interesting and well argued list including the likes of Jerry Falwell and Noam Chomsky, but Dean's comments on his fellow blogger's list was not to be missed:

You know, I've often thought John should drop the whole "Right Wing" focus and title of his blog. I'm sure he's proud to be a conservative, but when I look at some of the stuff that made it onto his published list, it brought home for me just how--what's the word? "Extreme?"--people get when they identify too strongly with partisan positions. I mean, honestly, I'm no Hillary Clinton fan, but is she really worse than Charles Manson, Lee Harvey Oswald, or Aaron Burr?

Conservatives of America, as a sometime comrade-in-arms, I just need to tell you: some of you guys need to get a grip!

Dean Esmay has a better list.

Bloggers rank Bill Clinton as the third worst figure in American History. Hillary is only listed at number eight, where she is tied with Timothy McVeigh and John Wilkes Booth, a full six slots ahead of Richard Nixon.

This list was clearly the work of rational people. Riiight.

K.Lo has it on good word that the BBC is full of idiots. The latest proof? A piece by Dr. Julian Baggini examining the ethics of placing a bounty on Saddam's head. Dr. Baggini highlights five areas of concern which every Iraqi citizen must consider before blowing the whistle on Saddam's whereabouts, including the ever important question "Does Saddam deserve to be captured and punished?"

Normally this kind of philosophical brain-game wouldn't bother me in the least, but Dr. Baggini's analysis is so muddled in anti- wishful thinking that his whole ethical argument goes straight to hell. Of the five ethical concerns posed there can really only be serious debate on one, the issue of potential harm to your family versus the good done by earning the $25 million reward. That Dr. Baggini is anything but certain that Saddam being captured by the United States would be an entirely good thing says a lot about his own moral compass.

Hey Tim Graham, isn't possible Howard Dean was wearing a bullet proof vest not because he's afraid of your average conservative, but because he was receiving death threats? While that wasn't a follow-up question in the Dean interview, would anyone actually doubt that Dean did receive death threats?

You say liberal media bias, I say nauseating 'woe is us' conservative spin.

CNN has a full profile on Google, which was founded in part on $1 million in capital raised from friends and family.

(Link via The Corner)

Another one in Massachusetts.

Supreme Court refuses to hear the case of Jesus Castillo, who was arrested for selling an adult themed Manga comic book to another adult.

I've never read 1984, but this has got to be the kind of thing that has Orwell spinning in his grave.

John Kerry again misses a whole week of work.

Eugene Volokh on party line voting:

Many people, I find, are opposed to "party line" voting (by which I mean voting in partisan general elections based almost entirely on candidates' party affiliation, rather than focusing more on each candidate's own particular politics or character). Such party line voting, they argue, shows laziness, stereotyping, or lack of independence. I, on the other hand, think that in most situations party line voting is just the most sensible, pragmatic approach. A few words on why.

Go. Read. Now.

re Stridex ad: why would there be a beautiful girl alone at a movie theater?

Frenchman turns 9-11 into a porn novel. And it's going to be a bestseller.

Now excusez-moi if we rename our fries and boycott your wine.

Nutella refuses to renew Kobe endorsement deal. Who knew he was endorsing that stuff in the first place?

Today's paper has yet another article detailing the damage 'Big Food' is doing to your children.

Big Food advertises too much: "So besides operating 13,602 restaurants in the United States, it has plastered its golden arches on Barbie dolls, video games, book jackets and even theme parks."

And kids watch too much tv: "During Nickelodeon's "SpongeBob SquarePants" 30-minute cartoon last week, more than half the commercials were about food. The spots showed that children who consume "Go-gurt," the new yogurt-on-the-go, loved skateboards and danced on the walls."

The Horror! Children remember catchy jingles: "Nicky Greenberg, who is 6 and lives with her parents in Lower Manhattan, often spends her afternoons watching Nickelodeon. She can sing the theme song from "SpongeBob SquarePants," and she says her parents buy her Kellogg's Cinnamon Toast Crunch because she loves the commercials."

But the real problem gets no attention:

Tatanisha Roberson, who is 8, was riding on the front of a shopping cart pushed by her mother, Erica, 24, heading toward the cereal aisle.

The question was posed: What kind of food is Tatanisha interested in? "Anything that comes on the TV, she'll get," her mother said, rolling her eyes. "Rugrats Fruit Snacks; Scooby Doo Fruit Snacks; Flintstone's Jell- O."

Can someone get Crimedog McGruff on the phone? D.A.R.E. needs to expand its mission, because there are a hell of a lot of parents who need to be taught how to "Just Say No."

From the Washington Post:

A first cousin to crankiness is New England flintiness, and this Howard Dean has. As with Jed Bartlet, the president from New Hampshire on NBC's "The West Wing," Dean's flintiness may derive from his sheer cognitive processing power and an impatience with those who aren't as quick. "He is extremely intelligent," says Joyce Davis, a Manhattan dermatologist who was Dean's lab partner in medical school. "I noticed that about him right away."

"He certainly doesn't suffer fools gladly," says Gary Gossens, an ex-CIA agent who is a Democratic state senator in Vermont.

(Via The Corner).

Ben Domenech offers an NFL preview.

Nick: "Will it be the Republicans who lose the independant vote for nominating a right-wing anti-Roe judge[?]"

Why would Republicans lose more of the independent vote for nominating a pro-life candidate than the Democrats would for opposing one? First of all, no matter which Justice retires, the new Justice will not be the deciding vote in a potential case overturning Roe. There are currently six votes on the bench for Roe (O'Connor, Kennedy, Breyer, Ginsberg, Souter, Stevens), so even if it were one of these justices who retire, there would still be a majority for Roe regardless of who is nominated and confirmed. And second, the public is just about evenly split on the abortion issue, with momentum on the side of the pro-lifers.

As to how the public will react to the nomination of a conservative, it would depend on who is retiring. There are two justices who might retire soon, Rehnquist and O'Connor. In neither case will the nomination of a conservative hurt the Republicans. If it were Rehnquist, Bush can plausibly argue that a conservative should replace another conservative. If O'Connor retires, Bush would have to nominate a woman to the bench. This, however, will be an advantage to Bush, since the Democrats will find it harder oppose a woman, and the media coverage will be more on the candidate as a woman than as a conservative. (And yes, conservative female judges do exist).

So I don't see any problems for Bush, unless it were Kennedy or one of the liberal justices. Kennedy is still relatively young, and the liberal justices are going to hang on to their seats until grim death, or until a Democrat is president.

Anyway, the issue is moot because there will probably not be an opening on the bench until after the next election, rumors of Rehnquist retiring next year notwithstanding.

This time from David Edelstein over at Slate:

Do Ben Affleck and Jennifer Lopez, the stars of Gigli (Columbia), have chemistry? Of a sort: He brings out her mushiness, and she brings out his wooziness. It's not the stuff of great screen pairings, which tend to thrive on tension more than harmony. Lopez plays Ricki, a lesbian "independent contractor" dispatched to keep tabs on a none-too-swift hood, Gigli (Affleck), who has been ordered to kidnap the mentally disabled brother of a federal prosecutor. Lopez saunters into Affleck's bachelor pad and mocks his machismo, then tells him not to "allow the seed of carnal hope to sprout" in his soul. But within seconds this ostensibly hard-ass dyke is jiggling her tongue and giving her co-star hot, appraising looks—which turn Affleck, already an actor of amazing edgelessness, into a twinkling doughboy. Disparaging her sexual preferences, he tells her that "every relationship has a bull and a cow," but Gigli looks for all the world like heifers in love.

****

Gigli's advice to Brian on the subject of how to approach women evidently makes him even more alluring to his lesbian antagonist, who finally demands some of that "sweet hetero lingus" for herself. I'd suggest that Lopez and Affleck issue a public apology to lesbians, but when moviedom's hottest couple is reduced to gobbling and mooing at each other, it's likely that heterosexuality has suffered the more lasting injury.

While seeing America's power couple crash and burn gives me nothing but infinite pleasure, I sure hope the bad publicity from this movie doesn't hurt 'Jersey Girl' one bit. Kevin Smith doesn't deserve to have his opportunity for real commercial success ruined by someone else's shoddy film.

Here's what Smith has to say about his Affleck/Lopez movie:

As for the film -- well, I'll say this: I fucking love it. I do. I really adore it -- moreso than anything we've ever done before. Outside of marrying Schwalbach and being too lazy to rip open a prophylactic that apparently had Harley's name written all over it (though not necessarily in that order), it's the best thing I've ever done. That's not to say it's for everybody; in fact, a good number of the folks who've loved our previous flicks will probably abandon us after seeing JERSEY GIRL is nothing like them (not even AMY), if they even see it at all. Anybody who incorporates "Snootchie Bootchies!" into their Internet postings or daily conversations might wanna wait for the CLERKS cartoon flick (which -- take this as promise or a threat -- is next for us) and skip this one. I'll save you the time of having to post this on our Web-board and let you know that I understand you feel I'm a "pussy," a "sell-out," "I've lost it" (whatever "it" was), and I "eat cok." You're not going to change my mind about the flick; I just love it too much.

Despite the horrid performance of 'Bennifer' on screen this week, that endorsement is good enough for me and my $9.50.

[Living in New York in the summer of '78] "I hated the Yankees so much. To me, rooting for them would be like voting Republican."

****

Over the winter, Leslie told Theo, "Be daring," when ownership offered his 28-year-old son the chance to be the youngest general manager in baseball history, a seat of power unparalleled in Old Towne prestige and pressure.

****

"I don't like to gloat over (Brian) Cashman getting reamed by his boss, because I know he's a good guy, but if Darth Vader The Convicted Felon should be discomforted, well, it pleases me to no end. ... The fact that my son is part of doing that to him is even better."

****

What's more, he had the courage to change course on his early-season mistakes in the bullpen and completely crushed the Yankees on the way to Sauerbeck and Williamson, leaving the Yankees with Jesse Orosco and Armando Benitez for those setup jobs.

Orosco? Seventeen years ago, Theo was standing on his parents' living room couch waiting for the final out on the Mets in Game 6, the final out on a Sox championship so he could leap into the air. It never happened. "They just climbed down," Leslie said.

****

"This is the job he would have liked as a culmination of his career at 56 years old, but to be (hired as) GM of the Red Sox at 28?" Leslie said. "Be careful what you wish for. What if he wins the World Series this year? What does he do next? Become a Jewish pope?"

Leslie Epstein on son Theo, the General Manamger of the Boston Red Sox. Courtesy of Adrian Wojnarowski and ESPN.com.

As Adrian points out "for now, Theo Epstein is the GM sticking and jabbing at Steinbrenner, sending Darth Vader and the Evil Empire into pure panic at the trading deadline. The Boss is right: The Sox haven't won anything yet. So far, it's just the boy wonder GM out of Brookline, off the top of his parents' couch. Theo Epstein is still waiting to leap in the air to celebrate that World Series championship. All his family and friends, all his fellow Bostonians and New Englanders, stand there with him. Just waiting. Still."

Silent bats have left weak pitching exposed, the Sox are 0-4 since their trading deadline deals. Red Sox Nation is taking the dry-spell in stride. We're just waiting. Nervous. No panic.

Yet.

I just noticed my Gregg Easterbook entry was titled "Tasefully named, Tasefully written."

Let's suppose that for some reason a justice of the Supreme Court had to resign, effective immediately. Which party would this cause more problems for, the democrats or the republicans?

This thought crossed my mind after I heard David Brooks say on The Chris Matthews Show this morning that the Bush team is letting conservative leaders know that their first Supreme Court nominee will not be a moderate, but will be someone they are very happy with. (I don't have the exact quote as the transcript isn't yet available on the transcript page.)

So who stands to lose more on this issue? Will it be the Republicans who lose the independant vote for nominating a right-wing anti-Roe judge, or the Democrats who would take body shot after body shot for politicizing a judicial nomiation that the nation will actually pay attention to? How far to the left would Dean, Lieberman, Kerry et. al. move themselves with the question of judicial nominations on the table?

Emmitt clarifies. I'm not convinced.