Not So Super

After that awful end to an otherwise very entertaining Ravens game yesterday, I'm thinking that this may be the first year since 2007 that I don't tune in for the Super Bowl (2007: we were in Zanzibar, and the game was actually on TV there - it IS a global phenomenon! - but kickoff was around 2 a.m., so I still haven't seen Peyton win a SB).

The Giants? Growing up a Washington fan and rooting for another NFC East team, especially a NY team? I don't think so. New England? Not because they beat Baltimore, but root for Belichick and Brady? No thank you. Best case? Maybe a sudden meteor shower in the Indy area. Or a Lucas Oil Stadium roof collapse. Well before the game, of course! I strongly dislike both teams, but not enough to wish death-from-above on them or their fans. In most cases.

When does spring training start? Oh wait, I'm an Orioles fan. Shit.

Taibbi's Take on UC Davis

The whole post is worth reading, but Matt is as succinct and as eloquent as ever:

These people are weak and pathetic, and they’re getting weaker. And boy, are they showing it. Way to gear up with combat helmets and the submachine guns, fellas, to take on a bunch of co-eds sitting Indian-style on a campus quad. Maybe after work you can go break up a game of duck-duck-goose at the local Chuck E Cheese. I’d bring the APC for that one.

I should know better by now, but it still surprises me that those who decried this during Bush/Cheney have been all too quiet about the continuation - even expansion - of these policies under Obama. A sign of the times. Politics(winning) at all costs. My guy can do no wrong, the other side's is evil incarnate.

Breakthrough Beer Technology!

No, it (probably) won't change the world, but what an awesome/crazy idea that's become reality: pouring draught beer from the bottom up!

http://www.grinonindustries.com/

http://www.thepostgame.com/features/201101/death-beer-line

Words of Wisdom from AZ Sheriff

Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik:

"The anger, the hatred, the bigotry that goes on this country is getting to be outrageous. The vitriolic rhetoric that we hear day in and day out from people in the radio business and some people in the TV business ... This has not become the nice United States that most of us grew up in. It's not unusual for all public officials to get threats constantly, myself included. That's the sad thing about what's going on in America: Pretty soon we're not going to be able to find reasonable decent people willing to subject themselves to serve in public office.''

This Year's Terps - A Cavalcade of Point Guards

I know it's only November, but after watching two out of Maryland's three wins so far, this looks like it could be a fun team this year. They've got inside scoring and rebounding from Jordan Williams, who looks to be in much better shape than he was last year, and could also be a year ahead of where Lonny Baxter was as a sophomore in terms of offensive skills. Cliff Tucker is probably their best defender not named Sean Mosley, and might also be the best outside shooter on the team. And then their are the point guards. Senior Adrian Bowie starts and has been solid thus far, but the freshmen behind him on the bench, Pe'Shon Howard (yes, that's actually his first name) and Terrell Stoglin, might both be better players. In fact, I'm betting that Howard starts over Bowie at some point this season. No matter who starts, ball handling shouldn't be the problem that it's been at times over the last few seasons.

Add what could be a deep but young (three more freshmen, one sophomore, one transfer) bench, and, well, we'll see what happens. Something else that's new for a Gary Williams team is its international flavor; one of the freshmen is from Iceland, and the transfer is a skinny Dutch guy. We'll know a lot more about this team once they face a top-five Pittsburgh team on Thursday night at MSG.

TSA Enters Fondling Business

The bad news is that if you don't want to be irradiated, or have your privacy invaded, by the TSA's new full-body scanners, soon you can get groped by a TSA "officer". The good news is, there aren't any additional fees or taxes associated with this! At least for now.

http://www.smartertravel.com/blogs/today-in-travel/tsa-experimenting-with-enhanced-patdowns.html?id=5396474&source=dealalert_test_b&value=2010-08-25+00:00:00&u=3E91EFB00D

I wonder whether the TSA will publish some guidance about how to tip your TSA officer for exceptional service. Slide the singles into his/her badge holder? The belt? In your belt or waistband (if they're any good at all, they'll find them!). And what happens if you opt for this perk in the middle of a raging erection? Will they wave you through the line, or would that provoke the Defenders Of Our Skies to take you into a back room and beat it out of you? Inquiring minds want to know!

The Wisdom of Buck

I know it's only three games into his tenure and they're still the worst team in MLB by a healthy margin, but so far I really dig Mr. Showalter's style, man. Not only are the O's 3-0, but we get post-game quotes like this:

"Part of playing, not only in the big leagues, but in the American League [is] big, strong, hairy guys here. They hit it where the grass doesn't grow. And that's part of playing in this division, this league. That's part of it. We've got some big guys, too. Maybe not as hairy."

More Guns? Great!

It seems that the group that's been knocking down gun regulations - first in D.C., then in Chicago, now has Maryland in its crosshairs (sorry, I couldn't resist). And so the literalism continues. Yes, the long-dead fellows who penned the Constitution were brilliant guys. But how did a "well-regulated militia", et cetera, morph into the right to head to the grocery store with a handgun on your hip? Yes, you can have the last Valu-Pack of strip steaks! No need to wave that thing around. By the way, you have some froth on the right corner of your mouth...there, got it. Good. By the way, I dig that American flag polo shirt.

If we want to be so damn literal, I have two proposals:

1. Continue to assume that Founders were infallible men - but not men who could see a future of semi-automatics and extended clips. That means no adapting the Second Amendment for modern times. Muskets for everyone! No complaining, especially from you right-wingers who are always whining about activist judges.

2. Find the nearest mad-scientist geneticist, and have him or her hook you up with the real deal. Who's gonna fuck with you once you're packing these babies?

Oil On Our Hands?

It's been broached many times since the beginning of the Deepwater disaster - how much culpability should we, the oil-drenched public, assume? I think that the answer is...some, but that the question misses the point. Why is any discussion of climate change coupled with a discussion of what kind of cars we should be driving? Most of our time is spent working in buildings with substantial energy costs, then we retreat to what are often energy-hog homes. The very practice of coal mining is an ecological disaster - not to mention the CO2 production - but makes for less compelling TV because nothing's on fire.

Standards for energy-efficient construction are improving for commercial buildings, meanwhile most of our homes are burning through coal using either old, inefficient appliances or newer, inefficient appliances chosen by a builder because they're the cheapest available.

Can we all stand to use less oil? Sure! But it's only a piece of a much bigger picture. I just don't see this particular catastrophe as the 'tipping point' that leads to real change, even if it does lead to more hybrids and EVs on our roads. Oil is a problem, sure - it's simply a smaller part of the overall problem than most people think.

The New Plutocracy: Now, With More Pluto!

I resolved to myself recently that I would try to limit new entries related to our beloved federal government & politics, and today's Supreme Court ruling that strikes down a lot of campaign finance limits, makes me feel so much better about that decision. I honestly don't know that it makes much sense to vote - in national/federal elections - anymore.

Not that corporations always have it wrong, or are inherently evil. Far from it. But once again, how is the Constitution interpreted so that corporation (legal entity) = citizen (human)? James Fallows is correct: our government, stagnated by corruption, dysfunctional as hell, is simply not keeping up with the rest of the nation. The only worthwhile national voting left is with our money - to appeal to those that really run the show, purchase (or abstain from purchasing) products and services that reflect the direction in which you'd like the country to go. Unfortunately, Congress & the Executive Branch are just middlemen now. You get the best deal by cutting out the middleman, right? Too bad that the private sector is really not that efficient/cost-effective/honest when it comes to providing some services (see: health care / military spending / Wall Street, respectively).

"Supporting" Actor?

I must say that I'm pleasantly surprised, but also baffled, at the Golden Globe nominations. Inglorious Basterds for Best Picture? Excellent. Christoph Walz nominated? Awesome. But nominated for Best Supporting Actor? What gives? Sure, in such an ensemble film, he didn't as much screen time as your typical Best Actor nominee might, but good luck trying to convince anyone who's seen the film that he wasn't the star. I assumed that he had a Best Actor (Golden Globes, Oscars, what have you) nomination wrapped up after the first scene.

Makes me wonder; if one of Tarantino's original choices for the role of the Colonel Landa, Leonardo DiCaprio, had been cast instead, would he have been bumped up to the big-boy's category?

The End of the NFL?

No, it's not very likely, at least in my lifetime, but who knows? I happened to catch some CNN on an airport TV while waiting for a delayed flight yesterday, and saw some coverage of (congressional?) hearings on concussions in football. CNN is a bit behind, as usual, because it ran this as 'breaking news' when these studies have been ongoing for a while, and Mr. Tipping Point wrote a very interesting article about it in the New Yorker recently.

Is watching tackle football really akin to dogfighting though? Not so sure about that conclusion. But I do know that while most societies consider themselves to be civilized, eventually some future culture looks back at certain aspects of said society and thinks, "those barbarians! how could they live in a world where _____ passed as entertainment! I'm glad we're more enlightened than they were back then." Is tackle football going to fill in that blank one day?

Is Nothing In This City Sacred?!?

Four young geniuses were arrested downtown last night after they were seen driving around in a pickup truck with the large #8 statue last seen on Eutaw Street, outside of Camden Yards. 

Did they really think that they could get away with it?

Lockerbie Ugliness

We know how the release of the convicted Lockerbie bomber is playing here - understandably, not well at all - but how's it look from the other side of the Atlantic?

This BBC article hints that the whole thing could be about oil. There's a shocker.

This piece in The Scotsman refers to a "Deal in the Desert" meeting in 2007 between Gaddafi and Tony Blair, but doesn't elaborate.

Most importantly though, there seems to be quite a divide between the U.K. and U.S. victims' families as to whether Megrahi is actually guilty. The trial was apparently controversial for a number of reasons.

Still, the whole thing looks really bad. Megrahi dropped his appeal when, due to a legal issue, it stood in the way of his "compassionate release". Scotland's justic system screwed up; they should have heard his appeal properly or kept him in prison. His release carries the stench of a minister who was swayed by prevailing U.K. opinion that the convicted got a raw deal. That should have been for the courts to decide during the appeals process. Sure, there would have been outrage from victims' families if he had won his appeal, but unlike the apparent capriciousness of his release, it would have carried some legitimacy.

Another Perspective on Health Care

This article from The Atlantic is certainly thought-provoking. Now, I can't vouch for the veracity of the author's statistics or other claims, but at face value it's a compelling article. A few items that I zeroed in on while reading it:

• This excerpt below reminded me of Bjorn Lomborg's take on global warming, that's it's really not so bad, when compared with all the other bad stuff that we could be spending money trying to mitigate:
  

  As a nation, we now spend almost 18 percent of our GDP on health care. In 1966, Medicare and Medicaid made up 1 percent of total government spending; now that figure is 20 percent, and quickly rising. Already, the federal government spends eight times as much on health care as it does on education, 12 times what it spends on food aid to children and families, 30 times what it spends on law enforcement, 78 times what it spends on land management and conservation, 87 times the spending on water supply, and 830 times the spending on energy conservation. Education, public safety, environment, infrastructure—all other public priorities are being slowly devoured by the health-care beast.
  
  By what mechanism does society determine that an extra, say, $100 billion for health care will make us healthier than even $10 billion for cleaner air or water, or $25 billion for better nutrition, or $5 billion for parks, or $10 billion for recreation, or $50 billion in additional vacation time—or all of those alternatives combined?

• Why does health insurance work so differently from every other form of insurance?:

  Health insurance is the primary payment mechanism not just for expenses that are unexpected and large, but for nearly all health-care expenses. We’ve become so used to health insurance that we don’t realize how absurd that is. We can’t imagine paying for gas with our auto-insurance policy, or for our electric bills with our homeowners insurance, but we all assume that our regular checkups and dental cleanings will be covered at least partially by insurance. Most pregnancies are planned, and deliveries are predictable many months in advance, yet they’re financed the same way we finance fixing a car after a wreck—through an insurance claim.
  

  Insurance is probably the most complex, costly, and distortional method of financing any activity; that’s why it is otherwise used to fund only rare, unexpected, and large costs. Imagine sending your weekly grocery bill to an insurance clerk for review, and having the grocer reimbursed by the insurer to whom you’ve paid your share. An expensive and wasteful absurdity, no?

  Is this really a big problem for our health-care system? Well, for every two doctors in the U.S., there is now one health-insurance employee—more than 470,000 in total. In 2006, it cost almost $500 per person just to administer health insurance. Much of this enormous cost would simply disappear if we paid routine and predictable health-care expenditures the way we pay for everything else—by ourselves.

• We hear a lot about how other nations' citizens have it better-off because of universal coverage. That might be true, but evidently they're struggling with rising costs too (of course, their care costs, on average, are still much cheaper than ours):
  

  Whatever their histories, nearly all developed countries are now struggling with rapidly rising health-care costs, including those with single-payer systems. From 2000 to 2005, per capita health-care spending in Canada grew by 33 percent, in France by 37 percent, in the U.K. by 47 percent—all comparable to the 40 percent growth experienced by the U.S. in that period. Cost control by way of bureaucratic price controls has its limits.

So what does it all add up to? Should we ("we" being the government, in theory, anyway) not even bother to attempt any incremental fixes, since they probably won't work? Will this round of supposed reform set the stage for a future, more positive round, or leave the public too frustrated or indifferent to try again?

The author's proposed solutions (on page 6 of the article) are attractive and certainly seem to make sense, but I suspect that we're already stuck too far down in the system; if people are up in arms about relatively modest changes, how would we ever succeed in so fundamentally changing the way that health care is paid for?

Health Care Town Hall Hysteria Goes Local

Ben Cardin held a "town hall" meeting on health care in Towson last night, with predictable results. Yes, the polarization of this country continues, with lobbyists and interest groups pulling strings (on both sides) and opponents of reform - any reform - hoping that volume alone will win the day.

O.K., so maybe you think the government plan is socialized medicine. Could even be true, depending on which form the final plan takes, but is that the best you've got, roll out the specter of scary socialism and hope that it sends everyone running for the hills? Now go one step further, and tell us why that's so terrible. Can't do it? Words escape you? Too hoarse from shouting down your senator/congressman recently? How about you make an actual argument or shut up. There's enough real data out there to argue for or against health reform, but if you're too lazy to do so, by all means continue shouting. Eventually though, you'll lose your voice, so it's win-win either way; a meaningful discussion, or blissful silence.

Will Defense & Baserunning Get Their Due?

Maybe, thanks to this very cool technology. Although limiting release of data to the public because of teams' "competitive concerns" is just plain dumb. Trust me, MLB franchises; if your shortstop sucks, the fans (especially the stat geeks) will already know it. This system will just act as confirmation.

Still, no matter how quickly technology progresses, the best fielding still has to be seen to be believed.

A Modern McNamara?

With the death of Robert S. (for Strange! seriously) McNamara, I've seen a few online pieces comparing the Iraq War's own Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, with the infamous "architect of Vietnam". In the future, will Rumsfeld be universally reviled, as McNamara evidently was? I don't think so. Sure, there are similarities: both presided over wars that were seen as disasters of planning and of execution, both were notorious micro-managers, both had put their stamps on war plans. But whereas Kennedy and Johnson were never able to sell their quagmire (sorry, but I'm legally obligated to use that word, since this is about Vietnam) to a skeptical and eventually outraged public and press, Bush, Cheney, and the neocons did a fantastic job of duping a complacent public and a lapdog press corps.

Sure, there will be moments when Rumsfeld feels the wrath of the public [aside: explain to me what a multi-millionaire is doing riding the bus? Part of me is impressed that he's willing to take public transportation, part of me wonders if he's really just incredibly cheap]. But I think that those moments will be few, compared to the many public excoriations that McNamara faced. And while I admire that this father confronted Rumsfeld at that bus stop, I wonder how much good it does, other than making the guy feel better (after his blood pressure returned to normal). Rumsfeld was already an old man, long-bereft of any idealism or sense of justice after various roles in government, when he assumed his last government post - very different from McNamara, who was 44 when he became Secretary and was, by all accounts, broken by the War.

Ah, Summer!

Sustainable Seafood, Recession-Proof Beverages

This ranking of supermarkets by the sustainability of their seafood operations (according to Greenpeace) makes me all warm and fuzzy because we frequently buy fish at Wegman's, but less-than-fuzzy because we also buy occasionally from Trader Joe's. Anyone else surprised that this hippie grocery enclave appears so far down on this list? Anyone not surprised that a chain called H.E. Butt is in last place?

What will we have with our fish...a nice IPA, perhaps? Recession-be-damned, we're [read: the U.S.] still drinking at about the same clip as we have since 1947, according to Callup (do these Gallup folks have a poll for everything?).