The Shallow End

Meant this to be much better, but it's too nice a day. Here, borrowing from Safire, is the "Office Pool" that'll keep us 'umble and 'onest in '06:

1. U.S. troops in Iraq at 2006 year's end will number: (a) current "base line" 138,000; (b) closer to 100,000; (c) closer to 90,000; (d) 80,000 or below.

2. The Robertscalito court will: (a) in the Texas case disengage from involvement in states' redistricting; (b) go the other way in Oregon, holding that federal power to prohibit substances trumps a state's authority to permit physician-assisted suicide; (c) decide that federal funds can be denied to law schools that prohibit military recruitment on campus; (d) uphold McCain-Feingold, enabling Congress to restrict political contributions but not expenditures; (e) reassert citizens' Fourth Amendment protection from "security letters" and warrantless surveillance.

3. Stock market will: (a) slump in midsummer, causing data-dependent Fed chief Bernanke to morph into "accommodative Ben"; (b) tread water while a barrel of oil gurgles down to $50 and media "convergence" zigs while corporate "disaggregation" zags; (c) finally reflect sustained 4 percent G.D.P. growth by Dow breaking through 12,000.

4. Super Bowl champ will be: (a) Colts; (b) Pats; (c) Broncos; (d) Bengals; (e) Bucs; (f) Bears; (g) Seahawks

5. Best sequel/remake will be: (a) Miami Vice; (b) Pink Panther; (c) Pirates of the Caribbean; (d) Superman; (e) X-Men

6. Moviestar most in need of a slap will be: (a) Michael Caine; (b) Tom Cruise; (c) Robert DeNiro; (d) Mel Gibson; (e) Sean Penn

Me? 1. (b); 2. (b); 3. (c); 4. (e); 5. (d); 6. (c)

Leaves Me Cold

Woke up one morning after a long night singing "Old McDonald" sniffling, sneezing, and the rest, so Mrs. 3000 saw our Good Family Pharmacist for relief . . . and stumbled smack into the hot zone .

No kidding, meth cookers and users' kids and neighbors drew some short straws living within a crow's mile of anyone ingesting anything maybe made of nail polish and drain cleaner that can kill or poison all around. For the bystanders, who wouldn't want to do more?

Putting my NyQuil behind the counter, yeah, that's more, but it's not enough and too much--except in our legislatures, of course, where "something" as always must be done.

According to the Palm Beach Post article, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement says "much of South Florida's illegal meth is smuggled from sprawling labs in Mexico, not brewed from a retailer's shelves of cold remedies."

And according to the San Diego Union-Tribune, "Thirty-six of the 416 children [in San Diego County] rescued from drug homes between May 2004 and May 2005 had meth in their system, according to county figures released in June. Most of the adults in those homes were chronic meth abusers," not cookers.

Anyway, there's now pseudoephedrine-free NyQuil (and my cold's gone). My thanks to Vicks for doing "something."

Baby, If You've Ever Wondered . . .

" . . . skyrocketing music-clearance fees are becoming major stumbling blocks for DVD reissues, often delaying or even completely derailing releases. Take WKRP in Cincinnati, for example: The 1970s sitcom used so much classic rock that it would cost 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment a mint to clear the tracks. Fox has suggested that it still is considering releasing WKRP, but others are not optimistic that the comedy and similar shows of its kind will ever make it into the market."

"Intelligent Design" Clip 'N Save

"To be sure, Darwin's theory of evolution is imperfect," Judge Jones wrote. "However, the fact that a scientific theory cannot yet render an explanation on every point should not be used as a pretext to thrust an untestable alternative hypothesis grounded in religion into the science classroom or to misrepresent well-established scientific propositions."

Because I love Stalin Malone

Just thought I'd give Mr. Malone a chance to whip up on me and 0ne of his favorite targets at the same time. Call it an early Christmas gift.

Sen. Clinton has joined the mutitude of the bizzare who seek to protect image of the country while destroying it from the inside. She co-sponsored an anti-flag burning law. Apparantly she, like so many others like her, is completely igorant of this country's birth and the power of the principles of freedom. I would never endorse such a bill, and I oppose the constitutional amendment that is surely coming. I just don't get these laws. Is there some epidemic of flag burning I'm unaware of? Is anyone being caused any real harm by this? (I get that Mr. Malone may feel that the harm in watching a flag being burned is the same as watching his family being tortured, you know six of one... But I still don't accept that). In any case, I view these flag burning laws the same way Mr. Malone views Murtha's comments. Blatant pandering for personal political gain, at the expense of the nation as a whole.

Great Strategy

Frist is saying he will use the "nuclear option" if the Dem's filibuster Ailito. It's a great move. While I haven't heard any real credible discussion about the Dem's filibustering Ailito, it allows Frist to look strong facing the dems, and readdress a sore spot in his tenure as Majority Leader. I don't mean this facetiously. Creating an enemy and fighting him is a great way to get your feet when you're struggling. It all depends on the dems and how they respond. They quickly, and predictably, did. And the response is perfect. Rather than treating it as a non-issue and trying to make him look silly, they've fallen all over themselves to fight back. The imaginary became real. Now Frist has an issue he framed, on his timetable, and one that he's sure to win. That's just solid politics.

Anything but Bias

Could someone explain to me please why in the middle of this AP article the following information is included:

"More than two-thirds of those surveyed oppose the presence of troops from the United States and its coalition partners and less than half, 44 percent, say their country is better off now than it was before the war, according to an ABC News poll conducted with Time magazine and other media partners."

And the following information from the same poll is excluded:

"A fourth of those surveyed, 26 percent, say U.S. forces should leave now, and another 19 percent say troops should leave after those chosen in this week's election take office. The other half say U.S. troops should stay until security is restored, 31 percent, until Iraqi forces can operate independently, 16 percent, or longer, 5 percent."

The second bit of data says that 52% of Iraqis agree with Bush's plan to keep troops there until the Iraqis can police themselves. I know there is a good explanation, because we all know that bias is a myth.

Bias, Bias, Everywhere a Bias, Indeed

God Bless John Goodman

Here's an excerpt from a NYT story on Alec Baldwin' s near-record-setting appearance as an SNL host this week:

"I wish him the best of luck," Mr. Goodman said, speaking by cellphone Wednesday night, between bites of chicken pot pie, from backstage at the Geffen Playhouse in Los Angeles, where he was preparing to go on as Big Daddy in "Cat on a Hot Tin Roof." "God bless the kid."
Mr. Goodman's streak as host ended in November 2001, and except for a cameo two years ago, he has not been back. On Wednesday, he made clear that he missed the show terribly - "For me, it was the week of the year, always" - and that it saddened him to contemplate his future as a host.
"I think my best days are over on the show," he said. "I'm too old to run around like that."
"The kids are a lot younger than I am," he added. "Chris Walken" - who has been host six times, most recently in 2003 - "he always gets the specialty material. Me, I just don't fit in anymore."

Me, I love John Goodman. Nobody for my money's been better throughout his career, and if he's sad, I'm sad for him. Who seems less like he's acting in so wide a range of material? Mundane household comedy, surreal psychodrama, and "The Big Lebowski"? Mark it zero!

Bias, Bias, Everywhere a Bias

Perhaps this is as controversial as calling Ted Kennedy a blowhard, but could a college professor get away with this type of slander if the target were blacks? Or gays? Would he only be asked to step down as the chairman of the Department of African American Studies? Would anyone ask what he was doing in that department in the first place? Or why this person was going to teach the course in the first place? Is it news to anyone that it is the media along with activist groups that peper an organization with hard questions when it behaves in a descriminatory way? I know that hypocrocy in one case does not prove the rule, but I ask you to consider when the media gets sturred up and when it doesn't.

McCain in McPain

I've been hearing rumblings regarding McCain and his anti-torture bill. Mostly from the talking heads and mostly along the lines of, "look I know he was tortured, and so clearly he has issue with it, but he will also tell you he broke, and it worked." Until now I haven't seen any actual references to what McCain said about his personal experience, but a web site called newsmax.com had an editorial about it by some guy named Carl Limbacher. Not to be dismissive, his bio is pretty impressive, but I've never heard of him. Anyway he makes the point that " Nearly forty years ago, however - when McCain was held captive in a North Vietnamese prison camp - some of the same techniques were used on him. And - as McCain has publicly admitted at least twice - the torture worked! " I thought, "well that's interesting," but when I read what Mr. Limbacher considered "worked" I missed it. McCain said he gave up his ships name, squadron number, and target, instead of the just name, rank and serial number. And then, after another episode, and 5 1/2 years later, signed a prepared document confessing to war crimes that he obviously didn't commit. I admit that I'm not a general, but I don't see the first "give"of information being that helpful, and the second is a joke. If we're looking to torture to get people to sign sheets of paper after 5 1/2 years, then OK. But in the most common hypothetical, a nuclear bomb is in the US and about to blow, I'm willing to bet that it would have blown after 5 1/2 years. The case against torture isn't that people will admit things under torture, its that they will admit anything. To call McCain's torture a success based on those two events is wrong. 5 1/2 years of torture isn't helpful, its sadistic. Maybe that's why he's so concerned with this. I'm sure he views the torturers and the government that supported them in a certain way, and he's honestly ashamed that his own leaders are now embracing the same useless assault on detainees.

The Backhanded Case for Media

So "cyber monday" was a hoax. It was created by shop.org an association of online retailers, yet the media jumped all over this. No one did any fact checking or they would have found that its only the 12th biggest online shopping day. In fact their press release even states that its "ONE of the biggest online shopping days of the year." But by the time the talking heads got it, it became "THE biggest online shopping day of the year." Why is this a defense? Because it demonstrates that the media is more inept than conniving. Had this been a mistake about a right wing issue, this would be yet more proof that the media is out to get the right. To me it's like government conspiracies. How can something so demonstratably inept be capable of pulling off anything nearly as complicated as a secret dedicated strategy against something, someone, or some idea? I just haven't been able to buy the biased liberal media arguement. Everything I've seen is explained by ineptitude, market forces, and the very human penchant for making mistakes. I've heard both liberals and conservatives decry their portrayal by the media. I've seen political candidates from both parties lose in part because of the media. I think its more that when bad things happen to you, or those you support, its both more noticable and it feels worse than when it happens to someone else, or someone you don't care about. I know this drives Stalin nuts, but he's so clouded by anger that he's barely my friend because I'm left handed.

GOP?

The small government GOP strikes again. Texas Republican Joe Barton has decided to call a hearing on the BCS. Seriously. Its like he got a hankerin on this issue and decided that while this is a great debate to have around the bbq, he would just take it on himself to waste lots of time and money on this. The best part, he doesn't even have any idea what he wants to do with it. He just want to talk. How does any conservative still support this party? Is there nothing the GOP won't use the government to solve. My bananas are a little green. Can I get Barton to call a congressional hearing on this? I played in a 3 on 3 basketball tournament a while back. I was in the sub 6' group but there were definitely people taller than 6'. I was sad. Can he call a hearing for me?

Bush's Speech

Sorry this is not exactly a breaking post on Bush's speech. First off, I'm glad he didn't name a timetable. I was concerned that it could happen. I do think we will begin troop withdrawals prior to Iraq being truly stable, but I just haven't heard a convincing argument for naming a day, and number for bringing the troops home. Given what I know (and it isn't much) I'm one of the 7% or so that would like to see more troops in Iraq. So kudos to Bush not bowing to growing political pressure from both parties to set a time-line. But what did surprise me is the general admission that the immediate post war planning was so inept. Two examples. One, the President said, " When our coalition first arrived, we began the process of creating an Iraqi Army to defend the country from EXTERNAL threats, and an Iraqi Civil Defense Corps to help provide the security within Iraq's borders. The civil defense forces did not have sufficient firepower or training -- they proved to be no match for an enemy armed with machine guns, rocket-propelled grenades, and mortars. So the approach was adjusted. Working with Iraq's leaders, we moved the civil defense forces into the Iraqi Army, we changed the way they're trained and equipped, and we focused the Army's mission on defeating those fighting against a free Iraq, whether internal or external." I'm sorry, but who did he think would be the external threat to Iraq, Gary Larson's Pillow Vikings? Which bordering enemy doesn't have machine guns, rocket-propelled grenades, and mortars? I don't even know what to do with that. Then he mentions, " When our coalition first arrived, Iraqi police recruits spent too much time of their training in classroom lectures -- and they received limited training in the use of small arms. This did not adequately prepare the fight they would face." again, what post war scenario plan was he looking at. How do you not properly prepare police in the use of their gun. Even in America, with no post war anarchy, police get extensive training with their guns. Did they talk to cops in Detroit? Miami? NYC? Again, disgraceful. And finally, his general statements of progress in safety just scared me. For example, there was a Purple Heart Boulevard? And even now, the best we can say is "attacks are down" in Purple Heart Boulevard. I thought he said "Mission Accomplished." However, I really liked the following statement, " Some critics continue to assert that we have no plan in Iraq except to, "stay the course." If by "stay the course," they mean we will not allow the terrorists to break our will, they are right. If by "stay the course," they mean we will not permit al Qaeda to turn Iraq into what Afghanistan was under the Taliban -- a safe haven for terrorism and a launching pad for attacks on America -- they are right, as well. If by "stay the course" they mean that we're not learning from our experiences, or adjusting our tactics to meet the challenges on the ground, then they're flat wrong. As our top commander in Iraq, General Casey, has said, "Our commanders on the ground are continuously adapting and adjusting, not only to what the enemy does, but also to try to out-think the enemy and get ahead of him." Our strategy in Iraq is clear, our tactics are flexible and dynamic; we have changed them as conditions required and they are bringing us victory against a brutal enemy." Just thought he was at his best here. Great lines, great way to nullify the political attacks, and a great compliment to the leaders and troops. If it weren't for that middle part where he basically admits that a group of monkeys planned the post war occupation, then it was a nice speech. On a personal note, I don't like his delivery, but that's just me. Didn't like Clinton's either. Why can't we get a president who can really deliver a speech. Everything is so much more fun.

Someone Defend This Guy

I'd love to go to a pep rally run by Senator Murtha. How inspiring it would be to hear him describe how our team would mop the floor with that other team...if only they weren't broken and worn out.

It is completely reasonable to say that our approach to Iraq needs to be improved. It is completely irresponsible to say that our military has been rendered inept by current bad polices. I guess when your Murtha and you spend a week in the glow of constant media praise and attention it emboldens you make a bigger fool of yourself than you might otherwise.

And for those who might mistake Mr. Murtha for an informed gadfly please answer me why this "broken and worn out" military remains the strongest proponent of President Bush and his Iraq policies? How can it be that an old man in the safety of Washington knows better of a war effort than the men and women fighting it? This man is a joke...a sad and pathetic joke.