Hope over Fear?

MITHRIDATES
Bradley Schiller expresses his worries in the Wall Street Journal about Obama's fear-mongering. He's right in that the over-the-top rhetoric can't be good for confidence, but where was the WSJ over the last eight years of real fear-mongering, when Bush told us we were in for catastrophic attacks unless we passed every single one of his measures and continued to mock American justice by holding people in perpetuity without trial?
More...
And it's pretty rich to single out Obama for calling this the worst crisis since the Great Depression without noting that people of all stripes in both political parties have been saying that for quite some time. Moreover, some of Schiller's points are just nonsensical. Yeah, there were far more bank failures in the Depression, but banks are much bigger now (or has the WSJ not noticed the consolidation in the financial industry it's been championing for years?). There are fewer bank failures now, but those that do happen are devastating. It takes a facile and petty mind to compare the failure of say, Jimmy's Corner Bank in 1931 to the collapse of Lehman Brothers in 2008.

But the entire argument is nuts. He writes "as [Obama] tells it, today's economy is the worst since the Great Depression." And then he goes on to note how he thinks the Great Depression was worse. Well, it was worse. That's why this is the worst economy since the Great Depression, and not the worst economy ever.

Schiller almost actually tries to counter Obama's claim by suggesting that the 1982 recession might be as bad as this one, but he uses very selective statistics. He compares peak unemployment from the 1982 recession to current unemployment figures, even though we don't know if we've bottomed out yet in this one. But this crisis features massive bank failures as well (Schiller fails to mention that this didn't happen in 1982). In 1982 the entire financial system wasn't at risk. It seems to me that this recession is much worse than the 1982 crisis, and Schiller's really grasping at straws if his argument is that Obama shouldn't say this is the worst since the Depression because the 1982 recession might, by some metrics, be just as bad. The current situation might be closer to 1982 than 1932 — that's fair to postulate — but that wouldn't refute Obama's claim.

To say that Obama's claim was way out of line, you'd have to provide very convincing proof — far more convincing than the trite argument Schiller makes here — that 1982 was worse. Or, show somewhere in your article a quote where Obama says this is as bad as the Great Depression. As is often the case with journalists on the left and right, the headlines and paraphrases usually exaggerate the statements of the politician. See headlines about John McCain, Sarah Palin, and Barack Obama on the Great Depression.

But Schiller does have a valid point in there. One worth making. It's not so noticeable amid WSJ's hypocrisy about fear-mongering, his selective statistics about 1982, his willful ignorance about the fact that most people are saying the same thing, and his embarrassing misunderstanding of the word "since." So I'll restate my own modified version of it here:

Talking about impending financial disaster will not boost confidence in a way that's needed to get people spending and lending again (nor, of course, will burying our heads in the sand and pretending nothing's wrong). Getting quick passage of a controversial bill with huge ramifications by threatening disaster is something we all hoped we were finished with, as well as loading up said bill with partisan policy and then calling the other body "obstructionist" for opposing it.

Now that the bill has passed, can we get back to Hope? Now that the bill has passed, can we get back to working with the John McCains of the world again?

Trains

MITHRIDATES
I love trains. But our trains suck. There are plenty of reasons for this, but the fact is undeniable. If you've ever ridden on a TGV in France or a bullet train in Japan and then come back to the US of A and taken a "high-speed" Acela from Boston to New York, you can't help but think that we could better.
More...
In 1981, France introduced a train with an operating speed of 168mph. The top speed of the Acela is only 150mph, which it reaches on only a small stretch, and averages 86mph, well below the the high-speed trains in Japan(125mph), South Korea(125mph), Germany(153mph), and France(173mph). If the Acela averaged 125mph, one could do Boston to Washington in 4 hours and 45 minutes and Boston to New York in around 2 hours.

So it's with great pleasure that this train lover anticipates the new investment in train travel that is part of the new "stimulus" package. High-speed and inner-city rail was slated for $300 million in the House bill and $2.25 billion in the Senate bill. So how did the Democrats compromise? By giving high-speed rail $8 billion in the final bill! Meanwhile, Amtrak got $1.3 billion in the final bill compared with $800 million in the house and senate bills.

It's not exactly clear where, when, and how this money will be spent, but some of it seems likely to go towards California's project for a 220mph rail link from San Francisco to Los Angeles, something towards which Californians have already pledged $10 billion of their own money they don't have. Bill Kristol may be right to mock Harry Reid for wanting some money to go to a 300mph line from LA to Vegas, but the California rail link seems like it's going to happen — and soon.

So if you're a Kristol type who doesn't mind subsidies for cars and planes — but hates them for trains — this image of Mike Dukakis in a tank helmet ought to cheer you up. Laugh at it while you read his well-reasoned defense of investment in high-speed rail. It's a good explanation of what to expect, what fantasies won't happen, and why it's necessary.

Some highlights:

There's worry that the states just aren't ready to move on stuff. They haven't done the planning and the engineering they need to jump into major projects when the funding is there. We have a major construction-management problem in this country. In Massachusetts, the governor wants to build a four-mile light-rail extension using existing right of way [tracks and property that are already in place], and it's going to take six years to complete. How can that be? Chinese and Irish immigrants were laying four miles of track a day on the transcontinental railroad, and that was in the 1860s.

Yeah, how can that be? It's a question that vexes us train supporters so much. France did it a generation ago. We built railroads across this continent before anyone else in the world knew what a train was. Have we made no progress in 200 years? What the #$%^?

It's also about government spending priorities. It's absurd to say we don't have money to expand rail. For what we spend in Iraq in a week or maybe 10 days, we could fund Amtrak's ongoing operations as well as make major investments. We spend about $30 billion a year on highways and about $15-to-$16 billion on airports and airline subsidies. We're talking about 6 percent or 7 percent of that for a national rail-passenger system. You're essentially talking about a few billion dollars a year over the course of the next 10 years for a system that we should have had years ago.

That's right. For all those who rail against government subsidies, the question has never been about whether to subsidize or not. We already subsidize by the tens of billions. It's just a matter of what we subsidize and what subsidies are most effective for a clean, safe, efficient, and fast transportation network.

If you want to build a European-style 200-mph high-speed system—the kind that California is now committed to—that requires exclusive rights of way. And it probably argues for electrification. That's an expensive proposition. We can use our existing rights of way to reach speeds of between 110 and 125 mph. In some cases you'd want to lay tracks alongside what is there so that passenger and freight trains can stay out of each other's way, but most of what you'd need is already in place.

Well, this bums me out. I want the 200mph kind. But the man is saying we can get 125mph for much cheaper. That's already a huge improvement. And the hope for people like me is that the California project proves the concept and the rest of the country demands more.

There's a 10-state plan to connect downtown Chicago to every other major Midwest city within 400 miles using trains that travel between 110 and 115 mph. The whole thing would cost around $7 billion, and the basic proposal calls for using existing right of way. That $7 billion is half of what it will cost to move forward with the planned expansion of O'Hare airport. Every third flight out of that airport is less than 350 miles. So if you build a regional rail system in the Midwest, you're also helping with congestion at O'Hare and opening slots for longer flights.

The point is we're a long way off from replacing cross-country flights with cross-country trains, but for travel under 300 miles or so, it doesn't make any sense to fly. Unless, of course, you live in a country that subsidizes its airlines and starves its trains to the point that rail isn't an option . . .

I've heard that argument a lot [that we're more spread out than Europe]. But from the Mississippi River east, we actually look a lot like Europe. There's similar population density and distance between cities. That's why the Southeastern states want high-speed service extended from Washington, D.C., down to Richmond, Raleigh, Charlotte and Atlanta. They know it can work. It's true that in the area west of the Mississippi to California, with some exceptions, these kinds of corridors don't exist.

The man's right on. It may not make sense to develop the network from Tulsa to Tucson, but the East is dense enough for trains to work — if given the chance. Let's face it, door to door the train is almost as fast as a plane to get from Boston to NYC. If that trip were shorter by an hour, and air travel weren't over-subsidized compared with trains, it would be a no-brainer. The same is true for Birmingham to Atlanta, DC to Philly, Jacksonville to Charlotte, and a hundred other routes. We're almost at the critical mass necessary to make train travel work in the US. Here's hoping this portion of the "stimulus" puts us over the top . . .

But read the rest of the interview. Even if you're not sold yet, it's a good place to start the debate.

You! Me! Dancing!: Los Campesinos! at the Paradise Rock Club in Boston

PHUTATORIUS
We showed up at the Paradise around 10 p.m. — at that age now where we can't be bothered to watch opening acts, although I hear Titus Andronicus does a good set.

You know you're going to see something interesting and original when you arrive at the venue and see not one but two glockenspiels on stage. You know you saw something interesting when band members have to run around between songs to pick up the glockenspiel keys and remount them, because they've been beating the hell out of them. That's Los Campesinos! for you, in a nutshell.
More...
After ten, fifteen minutes spent tuning their own instruments and conducting their own soundcheck — what? would you have them hire roadies? it's a seven-piece band in a lousy economy — Los Campesinos! hit the stage hard, leading off with "Ways To Make It Through the Wall," the opening track off the band's second album, We Are Beautiful, We Are Doomed.

This was Los Campesinos!'s second go-round at the Paradise — this time there were three times the number of people in the crowd, and the show was sold out. The band made note of this in the between-song banter. They behaved as though they were uncomfortable about the reception they were getting and at times they suggested they might be putting one over on us. All this is fraudulent. This band is brilliant on record, and stunningly good live, and they have to know it.

Why do I like Los Campesinos! so much? What made a great old friend of mine insist to me that they'd be right up my alley? How did he know that I'd buy right in after just hearing the one track he played for me, "Don't Tell Me To Do the Maths?" Well, here are some clues:

*Fast, furious, melodic music in the tradition of the Ramones.
*A violinist (see also James, Camper Van Beethoven, and other Best Bands Ever).
*A cute, blonde bassist (see also Stellastarr*, Smashing Pumpkins).
*And finally: clever, literary, postmodern lyrical stylings that range from the pithy —

I'm not Bonnie Tyler, and I'm not Toni Braxton,
And this song isn't gonna save your relationship:
Oh? NO SHIT!

to the downright incomprehensible —

We have to take the car 'cause the bike's on fire
We cannot trust your friends 'cause they were born liars
And if you you don't exist with hearts the size of a house brick,
Cease and desist!

All that and the lead vocalist's personal jerry-rigged drum kit (along with glockenspiel) at the front of the stage adds up to a can't-miss act for Phutatorius — though I recognize that Los Campesinos! might not be for everyone.

On that point, let's discuss this anarcho-syndicalist collective's front man (if that's not a contradiction in terms). Gareth Campesino's stage presence is as indie-cultivated as the horn-rimmed, hipster-shirted Paradise Crowd in Residence. He cocks his head when he sings, brings his arms behind his back, strikes sensitive, poetic postures. A fellow named Steven Patrick Morrissey started us down this path, and 25 years later, for better or for worse, this is what we get. It's no surprise, then, that a guy in the crowd repeatedly and indefatigably calls out "PLAY THE SMITHS!" between songs. For my part, I can never fault anyone who shouts these words — and the band members, too, take it in stride, serving up knowing smiles. And that's ultimately the saving grace on this point: Los Campesinos! are just fun. Gareth is, too, despite his grievous "I'm not comfortable being a rock star" put-on. You can't help but like the guy, because in between all the woe-is-me poses he's beating hell out of a glockenspiel, literally shrieking at us in an exaggerated Welsh accent (gone now the days where Brits endeavored to "sing American"), and attacking his drummer's kit.

In addition to "Ways," Los Campesinos! served up five other tracks from November's WAB, WAD. I bought this album last week, and I wasn't sold on it before the show. I'm not sure I'm sold now — it came out in a hurry, within 8 months of the debut LP I like a lot better — but some of the performances won me over to certain tracks. "Miserabilia" and the title track were two of these. I was pleased when Gareth introduced "You'll Need Those Fingers for Crossing," a song he said is about "a bulimic suicide pact." Oh, now I get it. Urk. The problem is that once you've been clued in to that fact, you don't hear this song the same way again. I didn't think they performed "Fingers" particularly well. Gareth noted beforehand that "nobody likes it," and afterward he thanked us "for our patience." "Documented Minor Emotional Breakdown #1" and "All Your Kayfabe Friends" were the two other new-album bits.

Notwithstanding their promises to inflict a disproportionate amount of the new material on us, the band served up a tweener single, "International Tweexcore Underground," and eight tracks off the Hold It Now, Youngster . . . album. "My Year in Lists" and "This is How You Spell, 'HAHAHA We Destroyed the Hopes and Dreams of a Generation of Faux Romantics'" were two standouts. "You! Me! Dancing!" was the show's climactic number, with its sustained Two Men/One Drum Kit beatdown firing up the crowd before the rhythm guitars triggered and the song suddenly snapped into its groove. This is standard fare at a Los Campesinos! show — at least, based on the two I've seen — and it's great theater. Same, too, for the band's coordinated amplifier-climbing at the end of "Sweet Dreams, Sweet Cheeks," the last song before the encore, "Broken Heart Beats Sound like Breakbeats." "Knee Deep at ATP," "Drop It Doe Eyes," and "Death to Los Campesinos!" also made the set list, which according to Gareth, was written out on pita bread that Neil and Tom Campesino subsequently tore up and fed to the crowd (I did not personally witness this administration of Communion and can't say for sure that it happened).

All in all, a terrific show, notwithstanding certain tired indie aesthetic tics and the all-too-periodic bouts of unintended feedback. They're the Ramones with glockenspiels and English lit degrees. They're Belle & Sebastian on speed. They're Los Campesinos! Buy their albums; go see 'em.

The Thin Mint Is the Best Cookie Ever Made

PHUTATORIUS
It's that time of year again: the days are getting longer, the great, bracing bulwarks of snow on either side of our driveways are shrinking in size (it's almost imperceptible, but it is happening), the sun is shining upon us, and the Girl Scout Cookies are out.
More...
Holy crap! The Girl Scout Cookies are out! They'd set up a table in the Harvard Square T station: it took me completely by surprise on the way home from work Wednesday night. I stopped, did an exaggerated double-take, bought five boxes.

Now I know I'm prone to enthusiasms, and I know, too, that it's probably not best to write when I'm jacked up on mass-market baked fundraiser goods and a lemon flavor-injected Big Gulp. Even Wordsworth, that great Romantic poet, made sure not to commit his "spontaneous overflows of powerful feeling" to writing without first "recollect[ing them] in tranquility." But I'm sorry — I've got to say it:

The Thin Mint is the best cookie ever made. Seriously. I love the Oreo, and I'm wont to observe, in moments of weakness, that when Nabisco Doubled the Stuf they halved the distance between man and God. I don't mean any disrespect to Mithridates, whose hometown gave us the Fig Newton. That's a good cookie, too. And pretty much anything with a Keebler Elf on it gets a gold star from me (especially the Fudge Stripes). But the Thin Mint is far and away the best cookie you can buy.

It's so simple. It's so perfect. The blend of chocolate and mint can't be matched — not in the Mint Oreo, not in your York Peppermint Patties, not in your chocolate chip mint ice creams and their several hundred variations ("grasshopper," etc.). The Girl Scouts have it down, and I have to tip my hat to them, notwithstanding they're a quasi-fascist organization that does nothing to prevent or forestall the transformation of its members into that most cruel and abased form of human being, the teenage girl (yeah, I'm still bitter).

Wikipedia tells us that, notwithstanding its strictly seasonal availability, the Thin Mint is the third best-selling cookie behind the Oreo and Chips Ahoy (Chips Ahoy? Are you frickin' kidding me? They're like sand cakes with chocolate jimmies in 'em.). It says something, doesn't it, that people hoard up boxes of Thin Mints and scalp them on eBay? It says something, too, that it's "Cupcake Day" here at work, but I'm not in any kind of condition right now to partake of any of the several plates of homemade offerings folks have brought in, because I packed away half a sleeve of Thin Mints walking to the office from the parking garage.

Now the philosophers might disagree with me, but I'm the kind to believe that perfection can be enhanced (that's why I'm always going back to edit these blog posts). On that score, I recommend that FO readers put their Thin Mints in the freezer before eating them. My mother taught me this trick. They're cold, they're crunchier. I won't say it's the only way to eat a Thin Mint, but it's surely the best.

In summation, I declare today that the Thin Mint is the best cookie ever made in human history. I will challenge to a fight and beat down to the ground anyone who says otherwise.

Masthead Archive: February 13, 2009

More...

A Queer and a Motherf****r

MITHRIDATES
Gets your attention, doesn't it? But the producers opted for the more tame An Officer and a Gentleman. Either way, the movie is brilliant and I had the adulterated pleasure of watching it on AMC last night. And yes, I have the soundtrack on vinyl. I also have the movie on DVD, but instead opted for keeping my butt firmly planted on the couch and watching the edited version.

And I'm glad I did, because I learned a thing or two about what's acceptable language on my favorite standard cable movie channel. Well, to be more accurate, I was totally perplexed by their editing rules and I'm not sure I really learned a thing.

PARENTAL ADVISORY: explicit lyrics. As in, I'm advising my parents not to read further.
More...
Here are a few examples ([Censored] words in brackets; movie quotes in italics):

• They treat me like [shit] . . . Some bull[shit] code of ethics . . . [I just can't shit on people and sleep at night]. OK, I guess "shit" is out, that must mean "bitch" is out, too, for sure . .
• KC Jones is a son of a bitch . . . That son of a bitch! . . . You bitch! OK, I stand corrected, "bitch" appears to be in, no problem.
• Quit whispering, sweet pea, [you're giving me a hardon], says Sergeant Foley to Officer Candidate Worley. Really? We can say "bitch," but can't talk about an erection?
• It's growing out more than an inch, says Worley to Mayo as he went to dance with Lynette. OK, I guess we can talk about erections, but only when the guy is aroused by a woman. Hmmm.
• The only things to come out of Oklahoma are steers and queers. I don't see no horns, so yo must be a queer . . . Best head in 52 states . . . Napalm sticks to kids . . . [Foley's a queer!] He got his balls shot off in the war! Why can we talk about someone's balls being blown off but not call them "queer? " Mutilated genitalia and mangled children are fair game, as is talking about oral sex between a guy and a girl, but even a hint of homosexuality is off limits? But wait a minute. We can call an officer candidate "queer," just not an officer. I guess 'cause we're still weeding out the candidates . . .
• Oh God! Oh God . . . So help me, God . . . Get the hell out of here . . . Damn you! [God]damn you! . . . Can't you bend your [God] damn rules? So lets get this straight. We can say "God." We can say "damn." But "God damn" is censored every time? We can even talk about Hell, you know, the place God damns you to. What's going on here?
• Jesus . . . Jesus . . . Jesus [Christ] . . . Jesus [Christ]. What? Really?
• Your father was an alcoholic [and a whore chaser]. OK, this is getting ridiculous, but I think I've figured it out:
  

There's a God and you can be damned, but it's not that God's fault. We can say "Jesus. " That could be Jesus Shuttlesworth or Jesus Quintana, for all we know. But Jesus Christ? Well, that's the Lord and we can't be taking his name in vain on television at midnight. And talk about penises, balls, and erections all you want, but homosexuality doesn't exist for actual military officers. Alcoholism is fine for the whole family, but prostitution is too dirty. Oh, we can call women "bitches" that's OK but don't say "shit." That's too bad a word.

OK, AMC was a little bit respectful of women. They did censor out the infamous "you little c***" from Mayo to Lynette at the end. But we censor that even here at Feigned Outrage . . .

I tried to think of some method to AMC's madness, but couldn't find anything on perceived severity of swear words in the US. (There's this great little report done about British swear words — skip right to the rankings on page 9).

But can anyone make better sense of:

Acceptable: bitch, god, jesus, damn, hell, balls, alcoholic, mutilated children, officer candidates might be queer;
Unacceptable: shit, god damn, jesus christ, whore chaser, officers might be queer?

Louis Gossett, Jr. won an Academy Award for his brilliant performance. His profanity was central to the character. Removing it weakens the movie. So if you really have to remove some of it, at least have rules that make some fucking sense.

Inglourious Basterds

PHUTATORIUS

Just try to tell me this isn't gonna be awesome.

Meritocracy

MITHRIDATES
There is a long history of racial and gender discrimination in this country. For a generation, liberals and conservatives have debated whether affirmative action policies attempting to remedy this are good, right, and moral or counter-productive, wrong-headed, and racist themselves. Both groups (once their heads are removed from their nether regions) would no doubt agree that the best society would be one where all were treated equally, all groups were well-represented in important roles, and all this came about naturally without any identity-based policies to promote such an outcome.
More...
And we finally have signs of this. Distinguished luminaries from the right and left have claimed that liberals supported Obama in part because of white guilt. For me it was all about identity politics. I don't have any guilt over slavery. It's just that the guy has a white mother like I do.

But we know for sure that good old-fashioned Republicans would never engage in such identity politics and are committed to selecting leaders solely based on their merits. Which is why it's so comforting to note that since the Democrats nominated the first black Presidential candidate, the Republicans simply went about picking the most qualified VP candidate to run against Obama, the most qualified person to lead the opposition to Obama, and now the most qualified person to respond to Obama's address to congress — all without regard to gender, race, or ethnic background.

If it were the Democrats, doubters might suspect that they were playing identity politics, but with the Republicans we know it's just meritocracy pure and simple, and that it had nothing to do with fear of putting white men up against a black candidate and President.

We're almost there as a society. Almost.

Masthead Archive: February 12, 2009

More...

Happy 200th, Big Guy.

FO News Roundup: February 11, 2009

We don't have the first clue what to say about the Robbie Alomar story.  So here are some bullets instead/in the meantime:

• Ticketmaster and LiveNation have merged. The benefits to customers will be considerable. For example, they now have two phone lines you can call on Saturday when U2 tickets go on sale. (P)
• Hey, wow: churches can evolve, too. I like the part where they say St. Augustine anticipated Darwinism with his observation that "big fish eat smaller fish." But hey, baby steps, right? (P)

More...

• Alan Dowd gets most of the facts right — and they're worth remembering — in the Weekly Standard, but misses the point. Our policies in the Muslim world have not always been selfish, and have often been entirely unselfish, but that doesn't mean Obama's mission to win over moderate Muslims shouldn't be applauded or supported. Sorry, did I just interject opinion into a news update? (M)
• Often modestly bad people are overly villainized in our society, and maybe the Peanut Guys are just getting a bum rap in the media like everyone else. But it sure doesn't look that way. Smells more like genuine evil. (M)
• I'm not sure where exactly it lands, but "Prime Minister in a National Unity Government with Robert Mugabe" surely makes my Top Five list of Jobs I Wouldn't Want. (P)
• I could rant for days about what qualifies as "news" in this country (Rihanna, yes; Zimbabwe, no), but just this once I'll tolerate another story about American Idol, because this one is downright ornery.  Could MSNBC be any more catty about Fox? (P)
  

Ua Mau Ke Ea O Ka 'Aina I Ka Pono

PHUTATORIUS
Bought my Big Gulp this morning, and I found two Hawaii quarters in my handful of change.


Word is the inscription on them, roughly translated, reads:

In six months you'll be lucky to have two of these to rub together.

We laud you for your wisdom, great King Kamehameha. Now quit being such a downer.

Shepard Fairey Sues the Associated Press

PHUTATORIUS
Good for him. What Fairey did with the photo was absolutely a fair use, and the AP is trying to shake him down.
More...
There is a larger problem here, and it has to do with the publishers' culture of trading permissions. Big Media organizations recognize the reciprocal benefits of granting permissions to one another: ESPN wants highlight footage of the Notre Dame home game on NBC; MSNBC wants to run clips of Peter Gammons's A-Roid interview. Everybody wins — including the viewer. Each network is fairly positioned to use the other's copyrighted video and rely on a fair use defense, but there's no need to take the chance. There's a free trade in permissions, so why bother with the uncertainty?

The problem comes when there's an asymmetry in the dealing — when the lowly Joe Blogger or Shepard Street Artist wants to make use of Big Media content. Joe and Shepard don't have anything to trade: an organization like the AP has nothing to gain from granting permission — and nothing to lose if it presses its rights.

And so the Associated Press can buy up truckloads of stock photos, and if by chance someone other than Ted Turner, Rupert Murdoch, or Disney should do something marketable and compelling with one of them, their lawyers will get on the phone and demand their cut. That's not unreasonable. That's how copyright law works. But the law also allows creative people to make "transformative" uses of another's copyrighted content, as Fairey did here. It helps, too, if the original work wasn't all that creative to begin with. So here: it's a straight-on headshot of a public figure. And all the better if, as is true here, the subsequent use does nothing to impair the rightsholder's existing and anticipated rights in the work. Fairey's poster does not remotely compete with the Press's licensing of stock photos of Barack Obama. It's a slam-dunk fair use.

Oh, and it's a bit rich that the AP spokesman is "disappointed by the surprise filing" of the preemptive lawsuit. All's fair in love and litigation, isn't it?

Shepard Fairey should win this case. He has good, committed lawyers and his cause is righteous. Of course, all that usually gets you only 35% of the way to victory in a copyright case in New York.

The Dangers of Being Too Familiar With Hip-Hop Lyrics

WHITECOLLAR REDNECK
The wife: Hey, look! The Grammys are on tonight.

Me: You think I give a damn about a Grammy?

The wife: (silence)

Me: Um, I was quoting Eminem.

The wife: (silence)

Me: It's just a line from one of his songs, it just popped into my head and I quoted it.

The wife: But why would you quote it if it wasn't how you really felt?

Me: (silence)

FO News Roundup: February 9, 2009

It's a little-known fact, but every Friday the 13th is preceded by a Monday the 9th. Here goes:

• Alex Rodriguez tested positive for testosterone in 2003; no traces have been found since. (M)
• According to the Wall Street Journal, Nicolas Sarkozy wants France to have a bigger role in NATO; French Communists are opposed. Sarkozy is the best thing to happen to France — and the best French thing to happen to the world — well, since Eva Green anyway. (M)

More...

• And news just wouldn't be fun without Fox. The headline on their website (at time of posting) refers to the stimulus package as 'Spendulus' even though that word isn't mentioned in the linked article. Brilliant stuff! (M)
• Bad news for pot-heads and good news for drug warriors. There may be a link between regular marijuana use and testicular cancer. Nuts! (M)
• ABC just announced this season's Dancing with the Stars lineup. Say it ain't so, Belinda! I had such a crush on you . . . (P)

Is Curt Schilling Retired or Not?

PHUTATORIUS
. . . because if he's not, he probably shouldn't be blogging about trades he wants the Red Sox to make.

Awkward Spring Training Moment #1: Clay Buchholz (he of the rare consecutive letters h) waves hello to Schilling. "Hey, Curt, I'm still here!"

New Funding for NIH!

PHUTATORIUS
While conservatives continue to root through the stimulus bill in search of causes for outrage (can't they just watch MTV?), and while we're on the subject of funded research, it's worth noting that the Senate version of the bill proposes $6.5 billion in research grants through the National Institutes of Health.
More...
This is huge. NIH funding had petered out over the last decade, just when the potential economic and public health gains of having a vibrant, dynamic biotech industry were becoming more pronounced.

It's not wholly unreasonable to argue that someone other than the government could be funding scientific research, if the payoffs are so tangible and considerable. The thing is, many of the big breakthroughs come in basic, not applied, research, and they're a long time in coming. Companies aren't going to take on the expense of big, basic research labs. Universities will — and do. And as a result, we have biotechnology, we have Google — we have the dynamic that transformed our economy from the backdated manufacturing model of the late '70s to the thriving tech-savvy machine that powered us through the '90s and early Oughts (before bankers killed it dead).

On a list of What Makes America Great, funded research has to make the Top Five. I know that doesn't sit well with conservative orthodoxy: not only are we talking about government spending, but it goes to "university elites" who work on projects that may not promise an obvious, immediate payoff. But government grants are exactly the sort of "investment" that pays off in spades. And in the short term, with every single NIH grant creating or supporting seven jobs, and while hundreds of researchers sit on the sidelines with worthy projects delayed by nothing but lack of funding, a grants boost ought to be a no-brainer.

It's so easy to come down hard on Congress for its failings. Let's give a big cheer to the Senate for getting something right.

Embryonic Step Forward

MITHRIDATES
While we debate the merits of the stimulus package and which group of partisans is more partisan, let's not overlook certain obvious and clear benefits of replacing Bush with Obama. Under Bush, the U.S. government refused to fund embryonic stem cell research, "one of the world's most promising medical technologies," according to The Economist.
More...
Obama has yet to make this official, but word is out that an executive order lifting the ban is forthcoming. This is not only a no-brainer for the advancement of medical science, but for the long-term competitiveness of the United States — a topic which will be a focus of this blog (or at least this writer). As The Economist puts it, "American academics will no longer have to watch enviously from the sidelines as their colleagues in Australia, Britain, China, the Czech Republic, Israel, Singapore, and South Korea push ahead." The United States has been at the forefront of medical research for a century, and it must be a top priority of any American administration to maintain — and improve upon — this position.

Bush apologists will point out that the Administration only withheld funding and did not ban any research practices, that for that matter not all stem-cell research was subject to the funding ban, that embryonic stem cells pose risks, that stem-cell research is is unproven at this point, and that opening up funding for one type of research will no doubt reduce funding for others. All true, but let's acknowledge here that the best way to push science forward is to let scientists pursue the most promising paths forward without government getting in the way. Moreover, because the funding ban required researchers to compartmentalize all grant expenditures away from stem-cell research — for example, stem-cell researchers could not use devices or materials bought with grant money for other purposes — the restriction added a layer of bureaucracy that made even privately-funded stem-cell research a costly and burdensome proposition.

To be fair, one of John McCain's signature maverick positions was to oppose Bush on his ban, and Obama overstated the difference between his and McCain's positions. But who knows if a President McCain would have had to appease the Palin crowd on this one?

Anyway, we're still waiting for the order, but this is a step forward. Hopefully tough financial times will not cause the new President to balk in his stated support of science and that he'll recognize how critical maintaining our lead in scientific research is to our long-term competitiveness. There is no country in the world that can innovate the way America can — at least for now — but other countries are eager to catch up. As India, China, and others begin to develop better institutions of higher education and promote technology centers, the incentive for those countries' leading minds to stay home will grow. The United States must do everything it can to continue to attract the brightest scientists and innovators from around the world — it's the surest way to maintain our long-term scientific and economic leadership.

PHUTATORIUS
This is one of the great disasters of the Bush Administration. Not only did he cut off the funding by executive fiat — he subsequently vetoed a funding bill that had substantial bipartisan support.

(Remarkably, Bush defended his veto by stating that "Destroying human life in the hopes of saving human life is not ethical — and it is not the only option before us." This from the man who threw thousands of lives and billions of dollars behind the proposition of elective, preemptive war.)

There was talk that Obama might duck the issue and simply defer the matter to Congress, with the expectation that they could muster another bill like the one Bush vetoed. Let's hope he doesn't go that route. Bush invoked executive authority to turn off the funding faucet; Obama is at the very least empowered to turn it back on.

How Many Licks?

PHUTATORIUS
Beware of experts!

Nigerian Poison Probe: No Way To Treat Big Business

PHUTATORIUS
Nigerian authorities are bringing "negligence charges" against officials at a pharmaceutical company after the company distributed a tainted batch of teething medicine, killing 85 babies.
More...
That's exactly the sort of thing the United States wouldn't tolerate. Wait — I should have been clearer: the poisoning we might well tolerate, but the legal action? Pfft. The strategy we've seen Stateside these past eight years is that we take the Food & Drug Administration, an agency created by Congress to oversee the review and market approval of pharmaceuticals, and load it with industry-friendly political appointees who rubber-stamp drug approvals.

Then, when a drug kills somebody and a lawsuit is brought, the drug companies argue that the FDA has the exclusive authority to pronounce on the safety of drugs it has approved — such that state courts can't award damages to the victim. The Supreme Court has already held that FDA approvals for medical devices preempt tort claims; in the coming months it's widely expected to extend this immunity to pharmaceuticals, too.

It's a brilliant one-two punch, when you think about it. Give the agency sovereignty over questions of safety, to the exclusion of any other government authority. Then remove the agency's teeth.

That, friends, is how you run a country that is hospitable to innovation. These Nigerians have a lot to learn. And you can bet that jobs will be lost — and small children will be rubbing their gums — as a result of this "lawyerization" of Nigerian industry.

FO News Roundup: February 6, 2008

So what do you suppose is Vladi's theme song? "Gimme Gimme Gimme?" "The Winner Takes It All?" Hm. Let's get to it:

• Two things we've learned from this week's Economist: Britain's chief of defense staff is named "Jock Stirrup" ("Now look, Colonel Bat Guano, if that really is your name . . ."), and the coupster currently in charge of the islands of Fiji goes by Frank Bainimarama (as in, Fijians hoping for democratic elections are in for a "Cruel Summer"). (P)
• "You're not bipartisan." "Oh yes we are. You're the ones who aren't bipartisan." "Oh yeah?" Etc., &c., et cetera, and so on, until the economy destroys itself and we all starve. (P)

More...

• Look: I don't even wanna know how much money New York City spent trying to figure out why things smelled like syrup. (P)
• Yeah, because nothing resolves feelings of alienation quite like being 1/15 of something. (P)
• Yeah, because nothing dispels the notion in the Arab world that America does the bidding of Israel quite like an Israeli leader going to America openly demanding that America do its bidding. (M)
• No joke, the main story on Fox News at the moment. We now know the extent of the creepiness of both Vladimir Putin and Fox News. (M)
• And I myself ponder world domination, but no lefty spin-mongers headline that story. (M)

His Name Is My Name, Too

PHUTATORIUS
Last Saturday we took the kids to the Museum of Science in Boston, where we have a membership. They have a "Discovery Center" where the younger children can play, and that's always a favorite with The Boy.

In the Discovery Center The Boy got into a box of magnetic construction toys. When he resurfaced, he stood up holding a blue plastic rod with a ball stuck to the top. The Wife saw him first, and she wondered if he'd made a lollipop or an ice cream cone.
More...
Turns out she was wrong on both counts: it was a microphone. The Boy raised it up under his chin and broke out into song — not any of the Beatles songs I've been impressing upon him lately (though he professes to like "Baby, You're a Rich Man" and "Dizzy Miss Lizzie" very much). No, the song that leaped to mind for The Boy was "John Jacob Jingle Heimer Schmidt." Of course, right? And before he'd hit the first "Jingle," he was marching, high-stepping across the room, waving his free hand in the air, bringing down the house.

This was pure impulse. This was a little boy doing just what he wanted to do at that moment, without any self-editing, any regard for context, propriety, dignity, the sensibilities of anyone else in the room — all these things that preoccupy adults all day long to the point of paralysis. He radiated exuberance and was consumed in The Moment. He was joyful.

As a rule I can't abide listening to parents go on about how their children "changed their lives," how "nothing is ever the same," and so on. When I didn't have kids of my own, the ranting, the fire in these people's eyes — it all made me think these parents had joined some kind of cult. And now that I am a parent, I don't particularly need to have what I feel all day long described to me.

But despite these reservations (and this is sort of the gist of this post, anyway: that as adults we're brutalized all the time by reservations) I've been meaning all week to write about "John Jacob Jingle Heimer Schmidt," because I don't think any adult can remember that glorious time in our lives when we were able to experience that purest distillation of joy that comes from just not giving a crap what anyone else thinks.

It's a beautiful thing, that kind of joy, and I hope The Boy hangs on to it for as long as he can.

Credit Where Due

VERCINGETORIX

Let me move past petty and make my first post on FO with some quick praise for Obama.

I've got to agree with David Kopel that this is positive news.  Anything that injects a little common sense (or even just room for rational thought) into the insane Drug War escalation is good in my book.  Respecting States' and individual rights to boot is a bonus.

Now let's just hope this is a campaign promise that he keeps instead of one of those other ones....

FO News Roundup: February 5, 2008

Lots of confirmation stuff today, but we'll have sex scandals and car chases tomorrow — even if we have to start them ourselves:

• Dammit! I was gonna predict a raft of "Obama's Hopes Dasched" headlines in the last Roundup, but I couldn't be bothered. Then Salon comes through with this. God bless 'em: they went with "Daschled." (P)
• "It's unpatriotic to pay taxes." "You won't be confirmed if you haven't paid your taxes." Next they'll be saying there are no patriots in the Cabinet. Dems, can't you see? It's a set-up. (P)
• So don't just blame Bernard Madoff for the Ponzi scheme that bilked investors of billions — his auditor should go to jail for criminal negligence — or perhaps nepotism? That's right, Madoff said only his brother was allowed to audit his company's books — and no one at the SEC found this troubling. (M)

More...

• Oh, the real John McCain! How I loved thee! How I missed thee! Go McCain! Beat Obama and the Democrats! Get rid of this absurd, counterproductive, protectionist crap! (M)
• Speaking of McCain, Fox News has a problem with the man's vetting process. Oh wait, they have a problem with Obama's vetting process? Tee-hee. The Gregg pick is brilliant. Even though he's got issues too, the Republicans can't squawk too hard over a Republican, can they? (M)
• "Wait, wait, wait, Officer. Whoa there. It's just a big misunderstanding. They told us it was a mission to Mars. Who could pass that up?" (P)

Idiot Watch: Jeff Jacoby

MITHRIDATES (with PHUTATORIUS)
Today Feigned Outrage launches "Idiot Watch," this blog's effort to expose the Web's most illogical and nonsensical commentators, argument by inane argument. Yeah, so we're a little behind on this. And there's only three of us signed on to beat back the blithering hordes of pundit orcs out there. But we do what we can to bring the world out of darkness. We'll try to be as fair as we can and attack both sides — Idiocy is not the sole domain of any one party or ideology — but I'm a natural-born lefty, so forgive me if I start with the prototypical knee-jerk conservative with a brain of mush. It's not that his positions are never right — sometimes he stumbles upon a Half Truth or two — but the process by which he seeks half-truths (usually by hacking Whole Truths to bits) is wont to leave Reason, Virtue, and Fairmindedness bleeding in the streets as "collateral damage."

Today's polemic about Obama's efforts to woo the Muslim world is not his dumbest, but if I had to wait for Jeff Jacoby to hit rock-bottom, we might be here for a while. This one is timely, it's modestly on-point, and it's classic Jacoby in that it combines his signature double standard-mongering with failures of basic logical reasoning. In short, it'll do, Pig:
More...

Carter's failure to understand the threat posed by the Soviet Empire had costly consequences for America and the world. Will that pattern now be repeated with Barack Obama and the threat from radical Islam?

We'll resist the temptation to engage Jacoby on his conclusory assessment of Carter's foreign policy. It's a bit galling that Jacoby so casually spins off these damning premises, but we're not necessarily inclined to defend Carter's administration here, when there are bigger fish to fry. For starters, the two enemies here differ so radically in their natures, methods, and agendas that it's ludicrous to compare them. Jeff might have a point, if Obama had ever said he thought Bin Laden and Khamenei were committed to peace. Second, to analogize direct diplomacy with Brezhnev and Castro to trying to reduce the hatred of Muslims for the US is asinine. It helped bring down Communism was that the people in those countries found our way of life more appealing and they finally revolted against an awful ideology — this is partly what Obama is selling to the Muslim world.

But running through [President Obama's] words [on Al-Arabiya] is a disconcerting theme: that US-Muslim tensions are a recent phenomenon brought on largely by American provincialism, heavy-handedness, and disrespect.

Well, this isn't illogical on Jacoby's part, it's just false. Obama has never said recent tensions are largely America's fault. What he's said is that the policies of the last seven years haven't helped, and it might be worthwhile to change course to reverse this downhill trend.

Missing is any sense that the United States has long been the target of jihadist fanatics who enjoy widespread support in the Muslim world.

Jeff, the man is trying to win over moderate Muslims around the world. It would be idiotic, as a matter of strategy, to come out guns blazing and blame the entire Muslim world for jihadist attacks (whether they receive widespread support or not). And for that matter, as a matter of principle it's distasteful to tar every religion's adherents with the dirty brush of its most radical, fundamentalist adherents.

Respect? Not even the Islamist atrocities of 9/11 provoked American leaders to treat Islam with disdain. "We respect your faith," George W. Bush earnestly told the world's Muslims on Sept. 20, 2001. "Its teachings are good and peaceful, and those who commit evil in the name of Allah blaspheme the name of Allah."

We remember this quote, we applauded it at the time, and we'll even accept that it was "earnestly" given. But its not unreasonable to judge a man by his actions, rather than his words — and by how he treats people, rather than religious abstractions. One unjustified invasion later, with the naked human pyramids and flushed Korans behind us, we think it's fair to conclude that though President Bush retained nothing but "respect" for Islam, he hasn't necessarily done right by a lot of its students.

Even more troubling is Obama's cluelessness about US-Muslim history.

"The same respect and partnership that America had with the Muslim world as recently as 20 or 30 years ago - there's no reason why we can't restore that," he said on Al-Arabiya. Well, let's see. Twenty years ago, American hostages were being tortured by their Hezbollah captors in Beirut and hundreds of grief-stricken families were in mourning for their loved ones, murdered by Libyan terrorists as they flew home for Christmas on Pan Am Flight 103. Thirty years ago, the Ayatollah Khomeini seized power in Iran, proclaimed America "the Great Satan," and inspired his acolytes to storm the US embassy and hold scores of Americans hostage. Meanwhile, Islamist mobs were destroying US embassies in Pakistan and Libya, and staging anti-American riots in other countries.

Here's where Jacoby goes completely off the rails. Yes, Muslims, some of them leaders of their countries, did bad things twenty or thirty years ago. He's using this as a proxy for the relations between American and the Muslim world. But Jeff, let's apply your logic to the Christian world. Once more round the bend, then: Christians have done some terrible things to Muslims in the post-Cold War era, most notably Serbs in Bosnia and Russians in Chechnya. America has stood firmly against the Christian side in these cases. Would it be fair to associate the U.S., and all the other identifiably "Christian" nations in the West, with these atrocities? Of course not. So let's not apply such facile reasoning to the Muslim world.

The fact is that we did have much better relations with the Muslim world twenty and thirty (even ten) years ago. The Arab world especially had a very favorable opinion of the US. This has plummeted over the past eight years. This is no judgment on the policy of the past eight years, it's simply a statement of fact. By denying this with the above smokescreen, Jacoby is either being remarkably dumb or intentionally disingenuous.

Radical Islam's hatred of the United States is not a recent phenomenon, it has nothing to do with "respect," and it isn't going to be extinguished by sweet words — not even those of so sweet a speaker as our new president.

Radical Islam's hatred is not new. This is true, but irrelevant to Obama's efforts. Obama is not trying to win over Bin Laden and Khamenei. He's trying move the opinion of the rest of the Muslim world away from radical Islam and back towards the US; just as the Cold War was won, in part, by winning over the people in Eastern Bloc countries, even as their leaders clung self-interestedly to an adversarial orthodoxy. Does Jacoby not understand the distinction, or does he mean to mislead the reader. Oh, and Jeff — he's our President. With a capital P. Cope with that.

Sooner or later, Obama must confront an implacable reality: The global jihad, like the Cold War, will end only when our enemies lose their will to fight — or when we do.

Exactly. And that's why Obama said in his inaugural speech, "We will not apologize for our way of life, nor will we waver in its defense, and for those who seek to advance their aims by inducing terror and slaughtering innocents, we say to you now that our spirit is stronger and cannot be broken; you cannot outlast us, and we will defeat you." Who knows if he means it, but he at least, unlike Jacoby, he understands the difference between the radicals we must defeat and the rest of the Muslim world we want to win over. There is a short-term and and a long-term battle to be fought here. In the short term, we have to thwart, preempt, and eliminate the radicalized terror networks. In the long term, we have to destroy the root causes of Islamic terror. These two ends are not incompatible, and you'd have to be an Idiot to think otherwise.

Is Obama's policy the right one? Was Bush all wrong? Another topic for another day. But let's try to get to the answer reasonably and tune out the imbeciles. Jacoby is way too dumb to have a column. Way too dumb.

Octopuppies

MITHRIDATES
As previously reported, an Indian companion on a recent train ride in Rajasthan explained why India was so populous. People there had children without giving any thought as to whether they could afford to raise them.

Here in the US, things are different. Here a woman can have in vitro fertilization to implant eight embryos, risk her health and the health of her children by carrying all eight, and then pay for the childcare of her fourteen (six previous) children by launching a career as a television childcare expert. And all it takes is a call to Oprah!
More...
According to her publicist she is "deluged" by book and TV offers. And who better to advise mothers on childrearing than someone whose behavior American Society of Reproductive Medicine calls "completely irresponsible?"

And near universal condemnation comes from the left and right. Of course the left thinks it's irresponsible to implant the woman with so many embryos and the National Review boils it down to society saying it's OK for women to have children out of wedlock. But all sides seem convinced that one way or another this is extremely bad behavior. But like most bad behavior these days, it seems likely to be rewarded . . .

Bruce Springsteen

WHITECOLLAR REDNECK

A while back, Bruce Springsteen signed a deal with Wal-Mart giving them exclusive rights to sell his new greatest hits collection. And last week, Bruce apologized to his fans for signing that deal, saying it was a "mistake" for him to partner with a faceless American corporate behemoth.

I'm glad he got that apology off his chest before his Super Bowl performance last weekend — in case you missed it, the Super Bowl signed him to play during halftime. Fortunately, Bruce doesn't need to apologize for signing that contract, because as we all know, the Super Bowl is a home-based business run by a small family of solar-powered vegetarian dolphins.

Michael Phelps

WHITECOLLAR REDNECK

I hope when he holds his obligatory apologetic press conference — the one in which he tearfully regrets ever having gotten close to marijuana — Michael Phelps will adopt the D.A.R.E. party line that "users are losers" by insisting that if he hadn't been all hopped up on dope he would have come home from Beijing with a dozen gold medals. Because otherwise, about thirty years of public service announcements trying to get kids to associate drugs with failure will have been wasted, or gone up in smoke (pick your preferred drug-related metaphor).

France

MITHRIDATES
Over a million people took to the streets all over France last week to protest the state of their economy. This is brilliant stuff. People around the world protest all sort of injustices, war, corruption, and the like, but you've got to hand it to les enfants de la patrie for coming out in droves simply to show that they didn't like unemployment and low salaries.
More...
I'm not a hater, mind you. I love France. And even the most gallophobic has to admire an anthem far more bloody and martial than ours (and the making of one of the best scenes in movie history). Oh, sure, they're a ridiculous people (aren't we all?) and we could make a long list of standard French hypocrisies, but in general I'm a big fan of the French, I don't know, je-ne-sais-quoi that makes hundreds of thousands of people blow off work and have a big street party. Hell, I even gave my dog a French name. I mean, who but the French had the savoir-faire to come up with the international distress call.

What I don't understand is how, sacre-bleu!, a protest like this — really against no one — turns violent. See now you're taking away my joie-de-vivre.

And this pretty much sums up the lovable French attitude:

Commuter Sandrine Dermont, arriving in Paris, said: "I'm tired and frozen after waiting half-an-hour on the platform.

"But I'm prepared to accept that when it's a movement to defend our spending power and jobs. I'll join the street protests during my lunch break."

How on earth skipping work, freezing your butt off, and clashing with cops "defends your spending power" is beyond me, but if it all made perfect sense it wouldn't be French, now would it?

Of course, the links above are all from American and British sources. What does Le Monde think? Well, that the current economic crisis proves the superiority of the French model (to be perfectly fair, my French is a bit rusty and there's a reasonable chance that's an article about shaving your poodle). It was more important to show this picture to it's readers to remind them that things are really bad in America. Hell, who wants to worry about your own country's problems when you can find flaws with the USA?

What's the raison-d'etre of this post? It's simple. The French wine and rack of lamb I had the other night has made my gout flare up and despite being high on the requisite opiates I felt the need to vent . . .

PHUTATORIUS
"I'll join the street protests during my lunch break." Ah, France. And that lunch break is no doubt a nationally-mandated two-hour siesta, so she'll have all the tear gas she can eat.

This reminds me of protest season at Harvard. They come like clockwork every spring — you don't want to march in the cold weather — and after exams, so the students in SLAM don't have to make any difficult choices.

Last year the students famously went on hunger strike to protest the hourly wage Harvard's security guards were earning. Never mind stuff like Darfur, right?

Turned out a dozen lethargic students sprawled out in the yard on blankets drinking Gatorade (!) wasn't all that compelling a narrative. Go figure. So the students marched across Mass Ave and tried to storm the labor office — only to be thwarted in their efforts by the very security guards whose cause they were championing. The guards kept them out.

You couldn't make this stuff up.

FO News Roundup: February 3, 2008

Phil punxed out on us yesterday. What else is new? Well, we'll tell ya:

• After the ’04 Olympics, it was drunk driving. Now Michael Phelps has graduated to the sweet leaf. Will it be "say hello to my li’l friend" in 2012? (P)
• Hey, Pepsi: we’ll give you an 25% ad spot discount if you cross-promote with one of our shows. Half off if you give us creative control over the work. And folks, there’s your deal with the Devil for January 2009. (P)

More...

• HHS nominee Daschle withdraws over a tax flap but continues to stand behind his ridiculous glasses (literally). We call it a wash. (P)
• If someone called you up and offered you five bucks to stand around in the cold outside a restaurant for two hours at the butt-crack of dawn, would you do it? (P)
  
• Some CIA jerk drugged and raped Moslem women in Algiers. Oh, and he shot videos of it, too. At what point is personal misconduct so damaging to U.S interests as to be treasonous? (P)

Johnsongate

MITHRIDATES
Personally I'd rather see Janet Jackson's nipple, but this latest episode does make you wonder how easy it is to mess with the video feed. As hackers get better at it, can we expect to see more hard-core pornography on family channels at family hours? Apparently this only worked on the analog broadcast and high-definition digital customers weren't affected. Maybe those rabbit ears are still good for something after all . . .

FO Special Edition: P & M's Super Bowl Chat

6:20 PM
Mithridates: are you there?
Mithridates: because she did say "above the fruited main . . ."
Mithridates: General Petraeus looks very small.
Mithridates: F. Scott Fitzgerald didn't know Kurt Warner. Lucky man.

6:30 PM
Phutatorius: Talk about Real American Heroes — they went from the U.S. Airways Hudson River flight crew to a trailer for a G.I. Joe movie. Which has me thinking, "Holy crap — they’ve made a G.I. Joe movie!"
Mithridates: Will Sgt. Slaughter get a cameo?
Phutatorius: I didn't think you could sing about a "fruited" anything in a song about America.
Phutatorius: The Boy wants to watch Bob the Builder. I mean, finally he wants to watch Bob the Builder — in the middle of the Super Bowl.
Mithridates: Not Kurt the Jesus Freak?
More...
6:35 PM
Mithridates: I'm torn. I can't root for the Steelers because they're the Steelers. But I can't root for Kurt the Freak, either. I'm just going to have to be a Hater for this one.
Phutatorius: Warner can get hurt, and the Cardinals can win. You can have it both ways.
Phutatorius: Touchdown, Steelers — I'm gonna put on Bob. Keep me posted.
Mithridates: I'd root for slaughter. I mean, if Arizona got really slaughtered like they deserve.
Mithridates: I'd be OK with that.
Mithridates: CHALLENGE!

6:40 PM
Mithridates: Angels and Demons will be terrible. Stop making bad movies out of terrible books.
Mithridates: NO TOUCHDOWN!
Mithridates: FOURTH AND GOAL!
Mithridates: Field Goal Attempt! Pansies!
Phutatorius: I'm back — no Bob on the TiVo.
Phutatorius: I have 25 buffalo wings.
Mithridates: I have none.
Mithridates: That was awesome!

6:45 PM
Mithridates: So far Doritos is in the lead for best commercial.
Mithridates: I think I know what I'm going to do. Since I don't really care who wins, I'm just going to root for the team with the most Princeton grads.
Phutatorius: Can we just have the old sideline angle back? This swingaround stuff is tiresome.
Mithridates: Holding, #69. How is there not a joke there?

6:50 PM
Phutatorius: The Girl wants wings — and she wants to play on the computer. She's relentless. I don't have enough hands.
Mithridates: Did Michael Cera just jump the shark? So soon?
Phutatorius: The AD movie can still save him.
Phutatorius: Uh, no — that would have been 2-D.
Mithridates: Your geometry is improving
Mithridates: Arizona sucks!

6:55 PM
Mithridates: Terrible. He was WIIIIIIDE open. And they were just talking about how great a start Roethlisberger was off to. Uggh.
Mithridates: OK, he made up for it.

7:00 PM
Phutatorius: Why wouldn't you run a slant like that on every play? Nobody can cover it or break up the pass, and you average 5 yards per play.
Mithridates: 3fast 3furious?
Phutatorius: THE FAST AND THE FURIOUS — PART 78.
Phutatorius: Chimpanzees are always funny. Chimpanzees and farts.
Phutatorius: If you want to make a big splash in the Super Bow Ad Wars — go with farting chimpanzees.

7:05 PM
Mithridates: And Will Ferrell.
Phutatorius: I'm waiting for Miss Teen South Carolina to come on hawking "Like Such As" perfume.
Phutatorius: Is Roethlisberger wearing a Kevlar vest?
Phutatorius: Kurt, call the Devil back: make the deal.

7:10 PM
Mithridates: I wish they'd stop showing ads for Belgian beer during the Super Bowl

7:20 PM
Mithridates: Oh shit that was awesome!
Mithridates: How did he catch that?

7:25 PM
Phutatorius: Clancy Pendergast.
Phutatorius: I didn't realize Charles Dickens had written the script for this.

7:30 PM
Mithridates: This, by the way, is the quickest moving Super Bowl ever.
Phutatorius: I have to say, it's not easy to type AND handle all of the pretend salamanders The Boy keeps pulling out of the carpet.
Phutatorius: Yes, [Boy]: I DO love salamanders.
Mithridates: Just not congressional districts that look like them.
Phutatorius: Is it me, or is it always 3rd and 22?
Mithridates: It's always 3rd and 22.
Mithridates: It's never you.

7:35 PM
Mithridates: Screaming Germans, Chimpanzees, and farts
Mithridates: are always funny.
Phutatorius: Oh, yeah, screaming Germans are hilarious [thinking of the 1930s and '40s].
Phutatorius: Actually, I've realized how they got to 1-D. A 2-D cutout, rendered in 2-D television, is 2-D minus D. So 1-D.
Mithridates: Only when turned sideways
Phutatorius: Bad move soaking your hands in I Can't Believe It's Not Butter before the game.
Phutatorius: It's not butter, but you can't tell the difference. That's the point, Edgerrin James. Geez.

7:40 PM
Mithridates: No one wants to see you naked!
Mithridates: Who would have thought a flower commercial would be in the running . . .

7:50 PM
Mithridates: Best Super Bowl play ever?

7:55 PM
Phutatorius: I didn't see it.

8:00 PM
Mithridates: woops
Phutatorius: They've been putting the replay crew through the ringer tonight, that's for sure.
Phutatorius: Madden: "if a guy makes a play like that, a run like that, you have to give him a touchdown."

8:05 PM
Phutatorius: Except it's not a play or a run quite "like that" if he's down before the goal line.
Phutatorius: The Pittsburgh Steelers have a charmed existence.
Mithridates: Not that charmed. If they win they have to go back to Pittsburgh and parade.
Phutatorius: They're hiding Keith Olbermann, aren't they?
Mithridates: This is already terrible.
Mithridates: Is he humping the mike stand?
Mithridates: Change songs already. This sucks!

8:10 PM
Mithridates: That's more like it.
Mithridates: Or it would have been if Bruce could still sing.
Mithridates: This is really awful

8:15 PM
Mithridates: Really and truly awful
Mithridates: Really very bad
Mithridates: This isn't good at all.
Mithridates: I want it to stop
Mithridates: I'm changing the channel

8:25 PM
Phutatorius: I'm watching on a delay — had to put The Boy to bed. Clarence is wearing some kind of minister's frock. I love how they import a concert crowd, all of them paid $15 a minute to keep their hands in the air.
Mithridates: Did Warner even run after the guy?
Phutatorius: In the replays he's shuffling awkwardly out of bounds. I think he then kneels in prayer.
Mithridates: Madden just talked about stewing in your own juices. Ick.
Phutatorius: The highway's jammed with broken heroes on a last-chance power drive.

8:30 PM
Mithridates: The stage is jammed with old singers on a last chance to be relevant
Phutatorius: U2, Tom Petty, Springsteen — they don't want to repeat the wardrobe malfunction, so they're going with the old guard.
Phutatorius: I love Silvio Dante on stage left. What would you give to have Paulie Walnuts playing bass?
Phutatorius: Oh, geez — he sang, "I had a friend, was a FOOTball player, back in high school."
Phutatorius: Urk.
Mithridates: DId he really not know that it's called a "fastball?"

8:40 PM
Phutatorius: I ain't gonna play Sun City . . . but I'll do the Super Bowl.
Phutatorius: No to Race to Witch Mountain. Yes to 1-hour Office special.
Phutatorius: This is too easy.

8:55 PM
Mithridates: I want some bacon bourbon
Mithridates: Would you be inclined to drink if all drinks tasted like bacon?
Phutatorius: The Steelers didn't get into the end zone. Somebody call some kind of a penalty.
Mithridates: The first Transformers was the most unwatchable movie I've ever seen one third of.
Phutatorius: Yes, but G.I. Joe is going to be AWESOME.
Phutatorius: Did someone just punch a koala?
Phutatorius: Where are we as a society when people are punching koalas?

9:00 PM
Phutatorius: That Coke ad was pretty good, but they'll never top the one with the Thanksgiving Day parade balloons.
Mithridates: Conan? Really? That guy's terrible. And he set up Terrence and Philip.
Phutatorius: We're funnier than Conan.
Phutatorius: Hell, YOU'RE funnier than Conan.
Phutatorius: What does J.D. Power & Associates know, anyway?
Phutatorius: I heard they rated themselves last at rating the quality of other companies.
Phutatorius: William V. Bidwill: his name is a lawsuit.

9:10 PM
Mithridates: He could be represented by Ben Jarvis Green Ellis
Phutatorius: Yes! It wouldn't be a football game without James Spader telling us that "Strength is power."

9:15 PM
Phutatorius: Mike Tomlin has become the blueprint.
Mithridates: “He got whacked.”
Phutatorius: Yes, and he's a Michigander, so I'm on board with that.
Mithridates: “working with alacrity”

9:20 PM
Phutatorius: Yes! Great stuff from Al Michaels.
Phutatorius: The no-huddle always works. No one should huddle. Ever.
Phutatorius: Arizona's gonna win. You read it first here.
Phutatorius: I like how it's 1st and goal, but the ball was spotted short of the 10.
Phutatorius: Details, people!

9:25 PM
Phutatorius: The Wife just gave the GE ad a 0 rating.
Phutatorius: She's harsh.
Phutatorius: If that were Pittsburgh on offense, they'd have called that play a TD.

9:30 PM
Mithridates: Wow. Pepsuber.

9:35 PM
Phutatorius: The Wife gave that one a -10, and she's considering revising her scale.
Mithridates: That was really bad.
Phutatorius: 4th quarter, tight game . . . time to pick a fight.
Mithridates: Pittsburgh, at this point. I couldn't bear it if Jesus led Kurt Warner to a miracle comeback.
Phutatorius: My father likes to say that if it was al Qaeda vs. the Steelers, he'd root for al Qaeda. That's where I am right now, too.
Phutatorius: Pull for the Cardinals and tune out the post-game interviews. That's how you do it.
Mithridates: I knew your father was a closet al Qaeda sympathizer.

9:40 PM
Phutatorius: Kurt's shaving points. Word is Jesus has big $$$ on the Steelers. It's a conspiracy.
Phutatorius: That was the most flagrant 5-inch penalty I've ever seen.
Mithridates: I don't know how he thought he'd get away with that. The penalty went on for like ten seconds.

9:45 PM
Mithridates: WOW
Phutatorius: WOW!
Mithridates: How do you let him get behind you like that? Unbelievable.
Phutatorius: Yahoo!

9:50 PM
Mithridates: google
Phutatorius: [product placement]
Mithridates: Danica Patrick has no self-respect. Good for her.

9:55 PM
Phutatorius: She's certainly not shooting for "just one of the guys" treatment.
Phutatorius: Tell us about the wind, Andrea.
Mithridates: Arizona needs to guard against the worst possible thing happening (thinks Joe Morgan).
Phutatorius: Right. Asteroids.
Phutatorius: They need to be on the lookout for asteroids.
Phutatorius: Holmes is a Buckeye. I'm not sure how to feel.
Mithridates: I told you all this game was gonna suck

10:00 PM
Mithridates: Holy shit
Phutatorius: Santonio, I don't know how to feel.
Phutatorius: Seriously, these replay guys are under a lot of pressure. You know they're throwing up into Thermoses up there.
Mithridates: Did he just pretend the football was a bottle of Heinz ketchup?
Phutatorius: Was that what it was?
Phutatorius: And here I thought I'd reached a low point with the Thermos slot-in.

10:05 PM
Phutatorius: Pfft.

10:10 PM
Mithridates: THANK YOUUUU JEEEEESSUUUUUUSSSS!!!!!
Phutatorius: No no no. There is good in the world, and there is evil. The Steelers are evil.
Phutatorius: No, don't try to tell me otherwise.
Phutatorius: You know it's true.
Mithridates: I agree. But the enemy of my enemy is my friend. If it's good enough for US foreign policy it's good enough for me.
Phutatorius: Really?
Mithridates: No, not really.
Phutatorius: That was a logical Mobius strip.
Phutatorius: I can't even figure it out.
Phutatorius: Esp. when you consider it was the Jesus people making U.S. foreign policy.
Mithridates: All right, I have to walk the dog and avoid post-game crap. Be back for one hour Office.
Phutatorius: Shut this down?
Mithridates: Yes.

I Challenge This Groundhog Day Ruling as Prematurely Issued

PHUTATORIUS
Earlier today we took The Kids to Drumlin Farm. As we walked through the gates, we encountered a posted placard (to borrow a phrase from the airlines' in-flight safety recitations) that informed us Drumlin's resident groundhog, "Ms. G.," had (and I paraphrase) stepped out earlier this morning, said, "Screw this," and burrowed back down into her hole — thereby declaring six more weeks of winter.

Much as I love Drumlin Farm, and I really do — I can't think of a better place to spend quality time with The Boy and Girl — I have to reject Ms. G's ruling.
More...
Now before the Sisters out there accuse me of sexism, I want to point out that my position on this matter has nothing to do with Ms. G's qualifications to do the job. Indeed, now that the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act is on the books, I would strongly advise the Audubon Society to check in with the Punxsutawney Groundhog Club, to verify that whatever bribes and lures they use to get Ms. G out of the hole are comparable in value and tastiness to Phil's goodies. No, Brothers: they don't call it Groundsow Day, but they don't call it Groundboar Day, either — or even Phil's Day — so we should let the lady make her call.

That said, if Ms. G. is going to be allowed her say, and if we're going to put ourselves potentially in the position of receiving conflicting mandates on the Six-More-Weeks question, it's not unreasonable to ask that she wait until February 2 to do the work.

Look: I understand that Drumlin is closed on Mondays — and I see, too, that they put together a terrific program for the kids today to celebrate the holiday. Free hot chocolate, educational sessions with the animals, and so on. Even if they were open on Mondays, the kids would be in school tomorrow. So I understand the predicament they were in. They sorta had to do it today.

Still, though, they jumped the gun, and I'm not gonna swallow six more weeks of this abominable weather, just so a couple dozen third-graders can have an excuse to pound Swiss Miss. I know it's just one day, but one day can make a big difference here. I mean, geez: the temperature's gone up some 20 degrees since Ms. G. turned tail and made her pronouncement. Give us a frickin' chance here. Whenever it's due to come, spring surely will be a day closer tomorrow than it was today. The world outside could conceivably look a whole lot more hospitable to Ms. G. tomorrow morning. She might very well come to a different conclusion. I mean, hell — if it really is the shadow that frightens the groundhogs back into their holes, it's possible we'll have clouds after sunup tomorrow, and no shadows at all.

It just — it — well, it could be different tomorrow. I therefore demand a do-over, and I'll have one, even if I have to jump the fence at Drumlin and trudge down there myself with a Snickers bar to wave over this little furry señora's hole.

Bacon Bourbon

WHITECOLLAR REDNECK

I'm not sure how I first came across Jacob Grier's instructions for how to make bacon-flavored bourbon at home — it may have been on Instapundit in which case you've probably seen it already —  but I tried it at home today. 

Instead of the ingredients Mr Grier recommends, I used Oscar Mayer bacon (because I'm cheap) and Jim Beam bourbon (because Jersey City liquor stores don't stock a wide variety of bourbon). It still came out pretty well. Running it through a coffee filter is something he recommends, but I think he should insist on it — made a big improvement.

We're Not Here To Feathers Ruffle

MITHRIDATES
I stopped off at Laurie's Planet of Sound yesterday and picked up the The Super Bowl Shuffle by The Chicago Bears Shufflin' Crew for $4.99 to get me psyched up for what is looking to be the worst Super Bowl since the last time the Steelers sneaked in.
More...



OK, the song is dreadful, but there's a moral in it for Super Bowl favorites. The most important lesson I learned from my eight weeks of Tae Kwon Do was to scream as loudly as possible when trying to break a board at your belt test. The idea is that if you don't break it you'll look ridiculous in front of a roomful of people. Granted, you'll look kind of ridiculous anyway; but really ridiculous if you miss.

I screamed as loud as I could and earned my yellow belt. This means you better not come at me with a knife or I'll use kicking technique #1. Wait, not like that. More straight on. And a little higher. There. Now, slowly. Got it. See, it works.

So there were the Bears in 1986 strutting around in their tube socks, making fools of themselves in as public a way as possible — the week before the Super Bowl. They're buffoons and I have the record to prove it. But think how absurd they would have looked if they lost. They knew exactly how absurd and so they made sure they took care of business and routed the overmatched Patriots 46-10.

If only last year's Pats had taken that lesson to heart, penned a few rhymes about being undefeated, and recorded a video. No WAY they would have lost . . .

I'm the punky QB, known as McMahon.
When I hit the turf, I've got no plan.
I just throw my body all over the field.
I can't dance, but I can throw the pill.
I motivate the cats, I like to tease.
I play so cool, I aim to please.
That's why you all got here on the double
To catch me doin' the Super Bowl Shuffle.