Remember when Trigger was just a horse?

The health insurance reform bill changes so often and so quickly, even within the same day, that an overwhelming sense of déjà vu has set in. Ideas that we thought were dead and buried are back again, making us wonder - is this a new idea, or haven't we heard this one before. Today, from McClatchy, it is the trigger:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., last week said he'd move ahead with a plan that allows states to opt out within the first year, but that's failed so far to stir the eight to 12 moderates whose votes are crucial.

Gaining support is the idea of a "trigger," where the public option only would be permitted if private insurers fail to lower costs. There are lots of other ideas, however.

Only if they fail to lower costs? Kaiser Family Foundation:



In the decade just ended, premiums increased 131%, and worker contributions increased 128%, compared against a 28% rate of inflation or 38% wage increases over the same time period.

In the United States, we spend more money per person on health care than any other nation in the world. And yet, in measure after measure, we trail most industrial nations and many developing nations in health outcomes. Without government intervention, there is nothing to stop insurance companies from continuing to loot the pockets of American workers. They have shown no willingness or ability to lower premiums year after year over a long period of time. So why should we wait even longer for them to show even more years of incompetence and avarice before a government-mandate intervention can be triggered?

In fact, public insurance companies have billions - yes, billions - of reasons to continue pushing premiums up, paying executive performance bonuses, and make no efforts to cut costs or ease the pressure on working Americans.

Company	Enrollment	Outstanding Shares
UnitedHealth Group	30,300,000	1,162,420,963
WellPoint	35,300,000	484,639,194
Aetna	17,700,000	442,800,000
Humana	8,400,000	169,657,445
CIGNA	11,900,000	272,704,706
TOTAL	103,600,000	2,532,222,308

These billions of shares have to receive dividends - profits on the backs of the diseases, disorders, illnesses, and deaths of other Americans. We don't need a trigger. We don't need to wait for more evidence that these health insurance companies are unwilling and incapable of controlling costs. We can see the problem clear as day. But too many people in power are too weakened by money and corruption to do the right thing.

Exhibit A: Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-AR). She is facing a tough re-election fight in a rare reddening state. When she is not busy being the pawn of Wal-Mart or Tyson (which is not often), she has the freedom to choose for herself what is best for her re-election chances - er, the people of Arkansas. Here is what those people told her this week - Progressive Change Campaign Committee (MOE 4%):

QUESTION: Would you favor or oppose the government offering everyone a government administered health insurance plan -- something like the Medicare coverage that people 65 and older get -- that would compete with private health insurance plans? (Wording of NYT poll)

	FAVOR	OPPOSE	NOT SURE
ALL	56	37	7

QUESTION: If Blanche Lincoln votes against a public option as part of health care reform, will that make you more likely or less likely to vote for her in the 2010 general election or would it have no real effect on your vote?

	MORE	LESS	NO EFFECT
ALL	16	29	55

QUESTION: If Blanche Lincoln joined Republican senators in filibustering and killing a health care reform bill because it had a public health insurance option, would that make you more likely or less likely to vote for her in the 2010 general election or would it have no real effect on your vote?

	MORE	LESS	NO EFFECT
ALL	15	32	53

A clear majority of Arkansans favor a plan like Medicare for all. And when it comes to the question of whether Lincoln should oppose a public option (-13) or join Republicans in "filibustering"* (-17), the affect on voters is similar enough to fall within the margin of error. Yet in this rare alignment of planets - the right thing to do AND the will of the electorate - Lincoln still seems to be in search of her spine. (So does her colleague Mark Pryor - he's not even up for re-election this time, but is still saying he will be guided by what Lincoln does.)

[* - until "filibusters" look like this again, I'll be using the quotation marks.]

And why is Lincoln still searching for her spine? Because in the 2009-2010 election cycle, only two people in the entire country have taken more from the health industry than Blanche Lincoln's $427,950 - Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) and Senate candidate and former governor Charlie Crist (R-FL).

Blanche - get off the fence and out from in front of the cameras, and do the right thing. Who knows? It might just get you re-elected.

Name that candidate

Courtesy of Pollster.com, CNN and Opinion Research Corporation have a new poll out today regarding the 2012 presidential election, potential candidates, and their approval ratings and strengths. Regarding one politician who is frequently discussed as a candidate in 2012, their polling found the following:

Not a typical politician: 65% Applies, 34% Does not apply
A good role model...: 64 / 35
Care about the needs of people like you: 56 / 43
Is honest and trustworthy: 55 / 43
Shares your values: 49 / 49
Generally agrees with you on issues you care about: 48 / 50
Is a strong and decisive leader: 47 / 51

Have you guessed the candidate yet? Most non-incumbents would envy numbers like this, and it would lead you to believe that the candidate would be in a strong position heading into 2010. But then check out the bottom line:

Qualified to be president: 29 / 71

Have you figured out that the candidate is Sarah Palin? Even among Republicans, the margin is only 52 /47 (4.5% MOE). Her favorability rating is 42 /51 in the same poll. So if she is strong in these traditional measures of candidate values and strengths, what is it about her that makes seven in ten Americans think she is unqualified to be president?

I think the key is in the last strengths question - is she a strong a decisive leader? She receives her lowest marks in this category, and it would be a concern for any candidate to have low numbers on this criteria. But worse for Palin, her decisiveness is sometimes misguided and unintelligible. Two of her biggest decisions involved quitting public positions - one because of a lack of ethics of others, and the second because of a lack of ethics on her own part. In a crisis, will she quit?

All of this, of course, is purely academic. Everyone involved in the Palin follies of 2008 is turning their backs on everyone else and seeking to cash in for themselves. Palin knows, or has been told using very small words, that she could rouse a base of her party a la George Wallace, but she could never win the nomination or the election. Better to strike while the iron is hot, take her place along side Newt Gingrich as post-political party elders, and bring in hundreds of thousands of dollars in public appearance fees.

At least the Miss California pageant could strip Carrie Prejean of her title, limiting her scope and impact. The Grumpy Old Party has stuck us with Sarah.

The Failure of Basic Journalism, Episode I

This is the first installment of many periodic series floating around in my head.

Traditional journalism, for good or ill, is in serious trouble in America. The local newspaper, the Raleigh News and Observer, just laid off several staff members, mainly because of corporate shenanigans of mergers, buyouts, and basic mismanagement. But from the looks of a story in today's N&O, perhaps some other staffers need to be let go for failing basic journalism.

Wednesday's paper features a story headlined "Choking game awareness foundation to host fundraiser". The choking game (which goes by many other names, too) is a form of self-asphyxiation practiced by some teenagers to gain a temporary high. If done incorrectly, it can lead to brain damage and death. As a former teacher and generally aware person, I have heard of the choking game. However, I was surprised to learn that there was a foundation for such things, and that it would have a fundraiser. It was just a weird headline.

So I head inside the article to learn more about it. Kris Marceno was 15 years old, the son of a wealthy Cary family, when he died after playing the choking game. His family created a foundation to his memory and to educate the public about the dangers of this practice. (Note to family: Your website is not as hip as you think it is. It's hard to load and relies too heavily on flash, making it possibly unreadable on some browsers, or so long to load that the viewer loses interest.)

Imagine my shock when the unnamed staff "reporter" wrote the following:

It's estimated as many as 250 to 1,000 teens die in the United States each year playing the choking game, according to the Centers for Disease Control.

250 to 1,000 teens die every year? A 9/11 of choking deaths every three to 11 years? How come I haven't heard more about this before?

The reason is because of a failure of basic journalism.

The website cites an unsubstantiated claim that as many as 250 to 1,000 teens die a year from the choking game, but also admits numbers are hard to prove because many of the deaths are recorded as suicides. While this is likely, the numbers still seem too inflated.

Somewhere along the way, the "reporter" attributed this statistic to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the chief recorder of medical statistics for the United States government. However, a quick 30-second visit to the Google provides the CDC's own information on the choking game.

Because no traditional public health dataset collects mortality data on this practice, CDC used news media reports to estimate the incidence of deaths from the choking game. This report describes the results of that analysis, which identified 82 probable choking-game deaths among youths aged 6--19 years, during 1995--2007.

The CDC's first attempt at estimating the prevalence of death from the choking game came only in February 2008. And while they admit the limitations of their methodology, their analysis debunks the "fact" that went unchallenged by the "reporter". According to the numbers in the article, it wasn't just 82 deaths in the time period studied, but 3,000 to 12,000 deaths. At an average rate of seven deaths per year, the choking game is as fatal as meningitis or heart attack, and less fatal than deaths due to HIV/AIDS, or appendicitis, or influenza, or kidney disease among those aged 5-14 (2005). (This data is not a direct comparison, but it provides a reasonable frame of reference.)

A few closing comments are in order. First, the "reporter" failed to practice basic journalism by doing independent research and verifying the information fed to him or her by the foundation, which is essentially an interest group. While its motives are good, the foundation benefits if people think the choking game is a larger problem than it really is. The "reporter" enables that by not checking the facts.

Second, the "reporter" failed to practice basic common sense. Stop and think about the numbers for a moment. Wouldn't you have noticed if a thousand, or even 250 teens, had died in a year due to this choking game? Shouldn't you have noticed? And if you didn't, shouldn't you have felt skepticism, the chief tool in a reporter's belt? If there were that many deaths every year, would the choking game really need an awareness foundation? While the loss of just one child to any cause of death is a tragedy for that family, this commentary is not attempting to diminish that loss. It is specifically focused on the journalism involved.

Finally, this is a brief six-paragraph article of local interest in a newspaper whose circulation currently ranks 60th in the country. But it is a big deal, because it is endemic of what is happening to journalism at all levels. And because as this staff writer grows in experience and reputation, he or she will continue to make the same errors, either willfully or not, and will continue to mislead readers. Next time, the story might not be about a rare cause of death among teens. It might be about war, national security, massive threats to public health, or something else far more critical.

UPDATE: I posted a brief comment on the story itself, highlighting the failure to check the facts. By the time I finished this post, the N&O had removed my comment. I have contacted the paper (Dan Barking, Senior Editor - Online) and I am waiting for a reply.

UPDATE 2: I received a quick and reasonable reply from the N&) today - my comment had a URL in it, which their policy prohibits. I am glad to set the record straight - and I hope the N&O will do the same.

Gratitude - April 19, 2009

1. I am grateful for the full functional use of my body.
2. I am grateful for breezy, partly cloudy days on the beach.
3. I am grateful for Cici's all-you-can-eat pizza buffet, even if the price has gone up.
4. I am grateful for my Honda Civic Hybrid, and the challenge of maximizing my gas mileage on trips.
5. I am grateful for small children and the simple joys they revel in.
   

Gratitude Diary - April 11, 2009

1. I am grateful for friendly and helpful people like Linda, who saw me at the CVS today in Jackson on my way to the laundromat, and offered to take my laundry home with her to do.
2. I am grateful for good health and decent eyesight, which allow me to focus on my work and on getting Dave healthier.
3. I am grateful for hunger pains that remind me of how fortunate I am to never want for food.
4. I am grateful for Brazilian jazz - that "ba da ba da baaaa" sound that puts me to sleep when I am alone on the road.
5. I am grateful for big stretches that make my muscles tingle and feel alive.
6. I am grateful for "Nessun Dorma".
   

Gratitude Diary - April 10, 2009

1. I am grateful for excellent-tasting food, such as River Hills Club's bacon cheeseburger. The bun is sweet and big and doesn't get soggy; the cheese is thick; and the bacon is crispy.
2. I am grateful for ball kids - young boys and girls. They have a joy and exuberance in their fidgetiness, and they love to be on court.
3. I am grateful for bunny, who loves me with genuine affection and respects my work.
4. I am grateful for deep breaths that help center me, even for just a few seconds.
5. I am grateful for playoff races and chases, and complicated tiebreaker scenarios.
   

The Best (and Worst) James Bond Themes - Part 2

[You can read my introduction to this series, along with the bottom five songs, here.]

25. "Die Another Day", Madonna, Die Another Day
24. "Another Way To Die", Jack White and Alicia Keys, Quantum of Solace
23. "Tomorrow Never Dies", Sheryl Crow, Tomorrow Never Dies
22."For Your Eyes Only", Sheena Easton, For Your Eyes Only
21. "All Time High", Rita Coolidge, Octopussy

20. "The Man with the Golden Gun", Lulu, The Man with the Golden Gun

Lulu was huge in the United Kingdom by 1974, when she was tapped by John Barry to sing the theme song for the next Bond entry.  She had a huge hit in the UK with "Shout", was a co-winner of the Eurovision contest, and had even hit number one in the United States with the title song from "To Sir, with Love" in 1967.  But her weak vocal styling, combined with what even Barry agreed was one his worst jobs providing score and theme in a Bond film, creates a parody of a Bond theme.

The song opens strong, true to the Bond formula - strong brass, aggressive percussion, and then an electric guitar theme that perfectly mirrored the rock music tastes of the time.  And then Lulu starts singing some of the tackiest and most suggestive words to find their way into a Bond theme.  "He has a powerful weapon..."  Her nasal tones and vibrato on long notes make this sound like an American Idol contestant covering the song.  It has a remarkable karaoke quality to it, but part of that feels built in to the song.  I am not sure that a better artist could have made the song less crappy. But it does beat out "We're an all time hiiiigh...."

Grade: C-

19. "The Living Daylights", a-ha, The Living Daylights

Fresh off the success of "A View to a Kill" by Duran Duran, composer John Barry and the producers were looking for an artist that could hit the charts again with "The Living Daylights".  Their first consideration had been Chrissie Hynde and the Pretenders, but they eventually settled on Norwegians a-ha, the first non-English speaking artist to record a Bond theme.  (Can you imagine two more opposite artists from this era?  Then perhaps I shouldn't mention that Alice Cooper claims his song "The Man with the Golden Gun" was considered in place of Lulu.)

By itself, the song is not a bad one.  It combines traditional sound with the emerging electronic instrumentation of the mid-1980s, and allowed a sequence where Morten Harket could plunge into his trademark falsetto made famous by "Take On Me".  But it fails as a Bond theme on several counts.  Sure, the theme mentions the name of the movie, but that's about the only connection the lyrics have to Bond.  They are largely nonsensical, and combined with Harket's occasionally thick accent, they are hard to make out much less comprehend.  And another sign of a weak theme - it doesn't have a reprise in the credits.  That honor goes to the Pretenders and "If There Was a Man".

Then again, perhaps I expected too much.  This was a Dalton film, after all.

Grade: C

18. "Live and Let Die", Paul McCartney and Wings, Live and Let Die

By 1973, John Barry was ready for a respite from Bond films.  So he temporarily turned his duties over to George Martin.  Yes, that George Martin.  It's no surprise that Martin turned to former Beatle Paul McCartney, who was at that time the most successful post-Beatles solo artist, to come up with the theme song.  And given the subject matter, that was no easy task.  Live and Let Die was released at the height of the "blaxploitation" era - in fact, it was selected as the next film specifically to take advantage of that - and it is filled with stereotypes that would be considered inappropriate in a mainstream film today.

I suppose this is one song where I diverge dramatcially from critics and most of the public.  "Live and Let Die" was a big hit in the UK and the US, and received both Grammy and Oscar nominations for best song from a film.  And I grant that the more aggressive parts of the song are appropriate for a Bond film and perfectly suited to adaptation during the movie.  But the bridge - oh, the bridge is awful.  And the changes in tempo are too much for my taste, too.  Further, the film went to great lengths to incorporate the cultures of New Orleans, Harlem, and the Carribean.  This song doesn't seem to reflect any of them to me.

I am a traditionalist when it comes to these songs.  I suppose this was just too dramatic of a change.

Grade: C

17. "Never Say Never Again", Lani Hall, Never Say Never Again

Many hard core Bond fans have mixed but mainly negative feelings about the non-EON remake of Thunderball, titled Never Say Never Again in reference to Sir Sean Connery's vow to permanently reject future James Bond roles.  One bit of anecdotal evidence in this regard - the title sequence of this film is not clipped on YouTube.  In its place are several amateur mashups of how the opening credits and theme should have looked, if this movie weren't such a bastard of the canon.  (Hrm, "bastard of the canon" sounds like a character in Les Miserables. But, as usual, I digress.)

Anyway, about Lani Hall.  She is easily the most obscure artists to give voice to any Bond theme.  Before laying down this track in 1983, she was best known as a bossa nova artist with Sergio Mendes, and as Herb Alpert's wife.  Oh, and she won a Grammy in 1985.  It's hard to write an entire paragraph about Hall.  So I'll spend two sentences on how hard it was instead.

This song lands at number 17 on our survey for one overarching reason - mediocrity.  The vocals are ordinary, and the lyrics are average.  The song has some redeeming aspects - for one, the verses build in melody and volume to a refrain, a common element in Bond themes.  However, the refrain is pretty awful.  Like that kid in your homeroom class whose name you cannot remember because he never did anything noteworthy, this is a forgettable theme in a forgettable film.

Grade: C

16. "We Have All the Time in the World", Louis Armstrong, On Her Majesty's Secret Service

For casual fans, as well as most die-hard Bond aficiandos, a Bond theme requires lyrics.  It's what we have come to expect from the artists.  However, this was not always the case, especially with the early films in the series.  On Her Majesty's Secret Service is one of the films with two entries on our list; because incorporating the title of this movie into the theme song was unwieldy, the film got an instrumental opening theme and a this vocalized end credits theme, by jazz impresario Louis Armstrong.

Because of the legendary status of Armstrong, the fact that this was his last recording, and the subsequent use of the song in advertising campaigns, "We Have All the Time in the World" is generally looked upon with favor by the public.  However, as a Bond theme - an action theme - it clearly fails.  Written by John Barry and Hal David, this is a love theme, focused on James and Tracy, and reprised throughout the film during generally tender moments (not counting Bond's burglary of the law office in Switzerland).

Based solely on Bond theme criteria this song would have landed in the bottom eight.  But this was Barry's fifth Bond film, and by this point he had established a tone - I hesitate to use the word "theme" - that created a thread between films.  This song fits well into that overall tone.  And if that wasn't enough, the composition of the escalating strings line in the background was brilliant, and perfectly suited for reprises during the film itself.  It adds to my enjoyment of this hard-to-love film that it has one of the best scores on a Bond film.

Grade: C+

Leaving Rush Limbaugh

I lost a friend today over Obama's budget, of all things. He displayed a graph on his blog showing the dramatic increased in proposed deficit spending in Obama's next budget. I explained to him that a large part of the reason for this was that Obama eliminated a lot of accounting tricks used by the Bush administration, particularly regarding war spending, to make the deficit look better than it was. He response to me was that I needed to stop "drinking the Koolaid [sic]". And so I explained to him that the reason I was able to stay good friends with some of our mutual friends with whom I disagreed was because we could discuss and disagree and be civil. If he was unserious enough that he had to resort to name-calling, then we could no longer be friends. Sure, that was my choice, but we face serious problems, and now is not the time for people without solutions to get in the way.

Yesterday, on a drive across North Carolina, I listened to Rush Limbaugh's address to CPAC. And I have come to the same conclusion about him.

"[T]he racism, the sexism, the bigotry that we're all charged with, just so you across the United States of America know, and you'll see demonstrated here as the afternoon goes on, doesn't exist on our side. We want everybody to succeed."

Really?

Rush, you are a racist. You have been a racist across four decades of "excellence" in broadcasting. In the 70s, you told a black caller to "Take that bone out of your nose and call me back." In the 90s, you said "Have you ever noticed how all composite pictures of wanted criminals resemble Jesse Jackson?" When Carol Moseley-Braun, the first African-American woman in the U.S. Senate, was mentioned on your show, you would play the theme "Movin' On Up" from the television show "The Jeffersons". When a caller told you that black people need to be heard, you replied, "They are 12 percent of the population. Who the hell cares?" You even claimed that Donovan McNabb, the long-time Philadelphia Eagles quarterback, got too much credit for the success of his team because he was black, and that the media wants to see blacks do well. And you opined, "Look, let me put it to you this way: the NFL all too often looks like a game between the Bloods and the Crips without any weapons. There, I said it."

This is not the surface racism that has some people referring to "good niggers" and "bad niggers". And these are not the once-in-a-lifetime racial misquotes of a sincerely open-minded person. These are the philosophical statements of a man who clearly believes to his core that non-whites are less than whites. Someone who believes that whites are superior. Someone so unserious that he will viciously insult millions of people to get laughs from millions of other people.

You are a racist, Rush. There, I said it.

Oh, did I mention that you are a sexist bigot, too? Using a drawn out syllable to call Hillary Clinton a "bitch" while claiming you didn't. Stating that John Edwards' wife "might be attracted to a woman whose mouth did something other than talk." Claiming that Rev. Al Sharpton was concerned about the Duke lacrosse rape case because he was "trying to figure out how he can get involved in the deal down there at Duke where the lacrosse team ... supposedly, you know, raped some, uh, hos." [Racism AND sexism – a two-fer!] Repeatedly referring to women activists as "feminazis" (a quick search of your website shows over 60 uses of the term). And even in this speech, calling CBS's Maggie Rodriguez an "anchorette," and then jokingly apologizing for it.

And now, you want to convene a summit of women because "I want some of these women to start telling me what it is I must do to close the gender gap — or, if not what it is I must do to close the gender gap, what it is I've done that has caused the gender gap." I thought you were a man of principles, Rush. A man who is telling conservatives not to change, that, like a diamond, "conservatism is…forever". Yet you are willing to ask women what you "must do" – differently, of course – to win their support.

"Also, for those of you in the Drive-By Media watching, I have not needed a teleprompter for anything I've said. [Cheers and Applause ] And nor do any of us need a teleprompter, because our beliefs are not the result of calculations and contrivances. Our beliefs are not the result of a deranged psychology. Our beliefs are our core. Our beliefs are our hearts. We don't have to make notes about what we believe. We don't have to write down, oh do I believe it do I believe that we can tell people what we believe off the top of our heads and we can do it with passion and we can do it with clarity, and we can do it persuasively."

Racist, sexist, and now hypocrite.

"We believe that person can be the best he or she wants to be if certain things are just removed from their path like onerous taxes, regulations and too much government."

"We don't want to tell anybody how to live. That's up to you."

Then why are you in my bedroom? Why are you telling me what I can and cannot do with my body, the one gift with which I was endowed by my "Creator"? Why are you telling me I can love anyone I want, as long as you approve of my choice of gender? Am I not a better person, a happier person, a better contributor to society, if I am free to love who I want, and to have his support in my life? If I love someone, and my government tells me, "No, you are not allowed to love him," won't that make me less happy? Won't it make me resentful? And, in Republican terms, won't that make me a less productive input into GDP? If I am unhappy at home, and in my most intimate, personal choices and commitments, how can I be fully happy in anything else I do? How can I reach my potential and be the "best" that you say you want me to be?

You are also a liar, Rush.

"They don't have the right to take money that's not theirs, from the back pockets of producers, and give it to groups like ACORN, which are going to advance the Democrat Party."

First, neither President Obama nor the Congress is trying to give money to ACORN. (Paraphrasing Jerry Seinfeld, "Not that there's anything wrong with" ACORN.) But it is a lie to say the ARRA is going to give them money. ACORN is eligible for grants in the act, just like you are. But it would be just as much a lie for me to state on my blog that "Republicans in Congress allowed a bill through that would take your money and give billions to Rush Limbaugh." Further, it is true that the money is not "theirs". But that is a spurious argument. This is a republic. We chose representatives to make decisions for us. And the majority of those representatives set the tax and revenue policies, and set the priorities for spending. The money is ours, but we have given the authority to spend it to them. If you don't like that, perhaps you should win a few elections and change it.

"In fact, the money he's spending is not ours. He's spending wealth that has yet to be created. And that is not sustainable. It will not work. This has been tried around the world. And every time it's been tried, it's a failed disaster."

Your willful hypocrisy and irony are blinding, Rush. You cannot admit that this is exactly what Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush both did for 16 years. They spent our great-grandchildren into a gaping hole. And you are correct that it is not sustainable. It is an aggravating factor in the current economy. Reagan and George H. W. Bush spent us trillions into the hole. Clinton reversed the trend and even passed four consecutive surplus budgets. Bush has done even worse deficit spending than his father, and that doesn't include all the war spending accounting tricks to make the deficit look better than it was. I've seen the charts showing Obama's proposed budget and deficit spending, some estimates up to $2.5 trillion in one fiscal year. I don't know where the final number will end up. But I know that because of the inaction and failures of the last several years, drastic measures are required.

"Spending a nation into generational debt is not an act of compassion."

Then how come it was okay when "compassionate conservative" George W. Bush was doing it? He added trillions to the national debt.

"I have learned how to tweak liberals everywhere. I do it instinctively now. Tweak them in the media. And no reason to be afraid of these people. Why in the world would you be afraid of the deranged? There really is no reason to be afraid of them. And there's no reason to assume they're the minority. And there's no reason to let them set all the premises and all the agendas to which we respond to."

Again, calling names is not a strategy. Referring to my party as the "Democrat Party" seven times because you think it tweaks us is not a solution; it is childishness. But I have a better rebuttal.

"We, ladies and gentlemen, have challenges that are part and parcel of a movement that feels it has just suffered a humiliating defeat when it's not humiliating. This wasn't a landslide victory, 52 to, what, 46. Fifty-eight million people voted against Obama."

Actually, had you wanted to be more negative, you could have said that almost 62 million people voted against Obama. But almost 70 million Americans did choose him. Obama beat McCain by 9,500,000 votes, the largest margin of victory since 1984. Your party lost 14 seats in the Senate and 53 seats in the House in the last two elections – that's nearly one-quarter of your members. So it is not just at the national level that your ideas have lost. They have also lost among the 435 individual constituencies in our country, too. Your platform did not just lose one election – it has lost dozens.

"We don't have the votes in Capitol Hill to stop what's going to happen. What we can do is slow it down, procedure, parliamentary procedures, slow it down and do the best we can to inform the American people of what's really on the horizon."

And now you're making sense. You don't have the votes to win on most party line issues. But you don't propose better ideas, ideas that can win. Instead, you suggest obstruction and delay. Just like insults, neither of these ideas will make someone's life better.

"[Obama] wants people in fear, angst and crisis, fearing the worst each and every day because that clears the decks for President Obama and his pals to come in with the answers, which are abject failures, historically shown and demonstrated."

I'm sorry, Rush, are you sure you didn't mean President Bush? Because after 9/11, Bush had the chance to unite this country and to ask us to sacrifice as Americans for the common good. Instead, he and his people sowed fear, doubt and mistrust among and between us, and used the uncertainty and the confusion to soil the Constitution, the document you claim to love. Do you only love it during Republican eras?

"When I look out at you in this audience, I don't see a Walmart voter. And I don't see a black, and I don't see a woman, and I don't see a Hispanic. I see human beings who happen to be fortunate enough to be the luckiest people on Earth since you are Americans."

Actually, Rush, I think the reason you didn't see a black, or a woman, or a Hispanic, or a Wal-Mart voter in the room is because there weren't any at CPAC! But I digress with my snarkiness…

"So as you leave here, as you leave here optimism, confidence, not guilt, it's not worth it. There's nothing to be guilty about. Don't treat people as children. Respect their intelligence. Realize that there's a way to persuade people. Sometimes the worst way is to get in their face and point a finger. Set up a set of circumstances where the conclusion is obvious. Let them think they came up with the idea themselves. They'll think they're smart that they figured it out. Who cares how you persuade them, the fact they can be persuaded is factually correct, it's possible"

So regarding what position are you trying to persuade me? What ideas do you have for leading our country? You claimed to detail what conservatism is, but you barely scratched the surface. And other than jokes, and pointing fingers, and calling names, you have not suggested any alternatives. Do you want Republicans to be in charge, making the decisions, and driving the agenda again? Of course you do. So suggest something. As long as you have no ideas, as long as all you can do is tear others down, your good wishes for our country will not matter. You will not win elections.

"Joe Biden was mystified how Bobby Jindal got his shift off at 7-Eleven that night to make the speech. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Time out. Suspend speech for explanation. People watching at home. I'm glad this happened. Glad this happened. You think I just made a joke, an ethnic joke about Bobby Jindal, don't you? I didn't. I made a joke about the bigotry of the Vice President of the United States, Joe Biden."

I try to keep myself open-minded. I don't prefer people who are mindless followers of any media personality. Yet I do agree with Keith Olbermann when he calls you a comedian. Rush, you are an intelligent and creative man. But you are unserious. You are a comedian. You may have some worthy ideas, but they get lost in the insults and the racism and the bigotry and the cheap laughs that you yourself display.

It's true that Vice President Biden made a comment about Indian-Americans during the 2008 campaign. And he explained them. The vice president does not have a lengthy dossier underscoring a pervasive bigotry like you do, Rush. But that is not even the worst part of your statement. The worst part is this: will calling the Vice President a bigot save anyone's home? Will it get anyone a job? Will it get health care for those who cannot afford it? Will it educate a child? Will it eradicate cancer? Will making a joke about John Kerry's skin color do any of these things? So, then, if you are truly interested in leading, in finding solutions, in being compassionate, then why are you wasting your first "address to the nation" on such empty punch lines?

It is because you are an unserious comedian.

I laugh at Bill Maher sometimes. He skewers liberals occasionally but saves his heavy ammunition for Republicans (and God). And sometimes he crosses the line into tastelessness. But he is also politically minded. He is aware of current events. He advocates some positions I can support, like the legalization of marijuana. But I no more want Democrats to follow him as a political leader than I think Republicans should be following you now. Put it this way – just like the president and just like you, Rush, Bill Maher is an excellent communicator. However, there is a world of difference between using inspiration, hope and ideas, and using humor as the vehicle to a destination. Comedians like you and Bill and Jon Stewart can inform and entertain people enough to win them over to a cause. But when it comes time to translate that into action, the comedian has nothing left to offer. There is no "there" there. Liberals laugh at Maher, but follow Obama. Conservatives have found both in you. That kind of vacant leadership is dangerous for our country.

I should be thrilled that both conservatives and you yourself want you to be anointed the new leader of the Republican Party. It should only lead to more gains for Democrats and progressives. But I can't be happy about that. That kind of political debate is not healthy for America. I want real ideas on both sides, and I want our people and our leaders to choose from among them. Because I know that Democrats do not have all the answers. And when we are wrong, which is often, there should be other ideas out there. Republicans have good ideas about some things. (I can admit that about my political opponents, Rush. You are incapable of that.) I want an active and vibrant Republican Party to contribute to the constructive debate about how to keep our country strong. A party that follows your comedy shows is not capable of fulfilling that role.

And so I have made a decision. For years, I have listened to you from time to time. I wanted to know what my conservative friends were hearing, and what ideas were in vogue on the other side. I wanted to be educated about you so that I could fairly criticize you when appropriate – and it was nearly always appropriate. But yesterday, you revealed yourself to be the unserious comedian that many have always expected. You are not a philosopher and you are not a political leader. You are a joker with a drive-time radio show, intelligent but boorish, willing to say anything for outrage or for a laugh.

So as I divorced CNN over a year ago, I am leaving you in the dust, too. I am not listening anymore. I am not keeping tabs on you. I am not following your latest outrage on Media Matters. I am not discussing you with friends or opponents. I am not boycotting your advertisers. I am ceasing to care about you politically because you are an unserious comedian. Rather than refusing to listen to you because you are a Republican, I have chosen to ignore you like I ignore Dane Cook – because you are not funny.

The Best (and Worst) James Bond Themes - Part 1

I am a major fan of James Bond movies. My favorite Bond? Easy – Sir Roger Moore. No, really. He played the part with equal amounts of charm and humor, and saved the franchise from extinction. But I digress. Many features of James Bond films have become iconic. The opening gun barrel sequence. (Which opening sequence is the only one in which Bond kneels to take his shot?) Maurice Binder’s excellent credits at or near the start of the movie, usually featuring naked women in silhouette. The gadgets of Q. The Bond girls. (Yes, Patsy Stone really was a Bond girl.) And, of course, the music.

For nearly half a century, the producers of Bond movies have usually sought out the top names in music at the time for the title themes – Paul McCartney, Carly Simon, Duran Duran, Tom Jones, and Dame Shirley Bassey (three times!). And occasionally their choices have generated a collective “huh?” from the audience. (Lani Hall? And, Lulu? Really? I mean, come on.) But between the star power behind the microphone and the writers behind the notes, the combination is usually quite memorable.

Though Bond himself is not anchored to any specific year, Bond themes tend to reflect the musical stylings of the time, and are quite varied. There are some ballads, some pop hits, some heavy metal, and some jazz. As a result, there is no formula for a perfect Bond theme. But a few criteria do apply. The song should be memorable. It should be able to stand alone, but it should also immediately conjure up images of James Bond. It really should mention the title of the film at some point. And, for lack of a better term, it shouldn’t be wussy. A ballad can be okay, as long as it is strong. James Bond is a lover, but he is first a killer.

So, just for the hell of it, here are my top 25 Bond themes.

(Notes: First, there have been 22 “official” James Bond films. Never Say Never Again was a remake of Thunderball and is not considered part of the official EON franchise – that makes 23 songs. From Russia with Love gets two entries in the countdown: one for the theme of the same name, and one for the introduction of John Barry’s “007 Theme”. On Her Majesty’s Secret Service also gets two entries: one for the instrumental theme of the same name, and one for Louis Armstrong’s closing credits song, “We Have All the Time in the World”.)

Let's start at the bottom of the countdown, number 25 - the only Bond theme to get a grade of F.

25. "Die Another Day", Madonna, Die Another Day

By 2002, Madonna had already topped the world of pop music. Every album she released had gone platinum, and she had 24 gold or platinum records. She had "acted" in several movies, though nearly all of them were commercial and critical failures. Highlighting the unevenness of Madonna's career, however, was the Golden Globe she won for Evita in 1996. So even though it was surprising she had not already done a Bond theme, she was already later in her career than just about any other theme artist in the history of the series. While the producers were hoping for another Evita, instead they got a Shanghai Surprise.

Madonna was knee-deep in her dance floor diva revival when EON came calling, and she didn't disappoint. As with the music of her middle-aged gay icon contemporary, Cher, it's hard to tell where Madonna's voice ends and the electronic computer enhancements kick in. Undoubtedly, it is a good Madonna song. But have you ever heard Madonna live - I mean, really, just her voice? She can't sing. So instead, we get this modulated robotic sound.

Madonna's rendition of the theme is like those artists who decide to perform the National Anthem instead of sing it with the spectators. The theme should be about James Bond. Madonna, as with everything, made it about Madonna. It is why she was nominated for both a Golden Globe and a Golden Raspberry for this song. If it weren't for an even more dreadful entry by Britney Spears from Crossroads, Madonna would have won. (As a note, she lost the Golden Globe to U2, but shared the Worst Actress Razzie with Britney Spears. And Madonna only had a cameo in Die Another Day.)

Grade: F

24. "Another Way To Die", Jack White and Alicia Keys, Quantum of Solace

It doesn't help that this song doesn't mention the title of the movie (though it does contain the word "solace"). It doesn't help that the title of the movie was taken from an completely unrelated short story, and therefore in this context is stupid. And it didn't help that this was the worst non-Dalton film in the series, by a long, long way. But the clincher was setting up the first, and hopefully last, duet in Bond theme history.

The music for this song, particularly the opening, are fantastic. It should be right up there in the top 10 of all Bond themes. And it would have been, if Jack and Alicia had never opened their mouths. This combination of sounds is revolting, so bad that it more than negates the great instrumentalism. "Another ringer with a slick trigger finger for Her Majesty"? No, thanks.

Grade: D

23. "Tomorrow Never Dies", Sheryl Crow, Tomorrow Never Dies

John Barry was the guiding hand behind Bond themes and scores from the beginning until Timothy Dalton came along. With a change in Bond, the produces sought a change in music. While Barry recommended his replacement, David Arnold, the lack of Barry's influence saw a generally steady decline in the theme music after 1987. The worst three theme songs date from this era. Without the experience and institutional Bond knowledge of Barry, theme artists with no investment in the franchise began going their own way with the music. (Exhibit A: Madonna) Sheryl Crow was the first artist in the post-Barry era to get lost on the way to the opening credits.

Whereas Madonna was one of the most experienced artists to record a Bond theme, Crow was one of the least. She exploded onto the scene in the mid-1990s, taking home three Grammys for Tuesday Night Music Club. But her work here with Mitchell Froom, husband of Suzanne Vega, has several fatal flaws. The choice of an equivalent 6/8 time gives the song a dolorous quality that is not in sync with the action of the movie. Thus, it did not lend itself to be reprised during the movie, as good Bond themes do. It also was not a good fit for Crow's mezzo voice; during the refrain, it feels like there are notes that she struggles to reach. And the rhythm and repetitiveness of the background piano is unfortunately reminiscent of this.

Grade: D

22."For Your Eyes Only", Sheena Easton, For Your Eyes Only

John Barry refused to return to the United Kingdom in 1981 for tax reasons. So EON Productions called on the man who gave us the music to all the Rocky movies, as well as the theme songs from Dynasty and Falcon Crest, Bill Conti. Needless to say, the result was a piano-heavy ballad that is one of the wussiest songs to ever grace a Bond film. Meanwhile, Scottish singer Sheena Easton had exploded onto the pop scene the year before, and would have been an unlikely choice to sing a traditional Bond theme. And unlikelier still, Easton is the only singer to appear in the opening credits. But the musical and vocal styles paired well with Conti's composition. The result was a very good ballad, but a very poor Bond theme. John Barry would return for the next Bond film, but this hiatus marked the end of his best Bond work.

Grade: C-

21. "All Time High", Rita Coolidge, Octopussy

John Barry came back from his one-film vacation to write the music and theme for the next installment after For Your Eyes Only. But how does a composer honor the Bond tradition of incorporating the movie title into the song when the movie is called Octopussy? John Barry brought in Broadway lyricist Tim Rice to help, and the result was only the second Bond theme to date that failed to mention the title of the film. (The first was Dr. No.) The selection of Rita Coolidge was a mystery, however. Coolidge had had an uneven if uneventful career, mainly known for covers of other artists' hits, as well as for breaking up Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young by leaving one of the singers for another. As with Sheena Easton before her, her voice was well-suited to the ballad that Rice and Barry created. But because it had little connection to the film, it is probably the least memorable Bond theme in the last half century. (As an aside, the balladry that Bond themes experienced in the 1980s seems well-suited to the character that Roger Moore brought to the role.)

Grade: C-

News You Can Misuse: February 9, 2009

First today, some things you can really not use...

Carrie Fisher was the special guest on last week's episode of Wait, Wait, Don't Tell Me. She was promoting her new best-selling book, Wishful Drinking - that is, when she wasn't being hilarious. (If you haven't visited her blog, you have my permission to stop reading and go here.) Anyway, host Peter Sagal asked her to reveal something about Sir Alec Guinness that she hadn't written about. She replied, "Alec Guinness once gave Mark Hamill 20 pounds to go away." She also mentioned that during the famous gold bikini scene, the clothing would not adhere to her body. So while she was sprawled across Jabba the Hutt, Boba Fett was standing behind her and "could see all the way to Florida." I love Carrie Fisher. (Ask her about when Cary Grant called her - not once, but twice - to tell her not to use LSD.)

This morning as I wrote at at breakfast, I had VH-1 Classic on in the background. The familiar "Oh-ay-oh-ay" of the Miami Sound Machine's "Rhythm is Gonna Get You" started, and I looked up to watch the video. Oh, Lord, the 80s. But what caught my attention was that several band members were wearing t-shirts with "MSM" in large letters on the front. And all my brain kept saying was, "mainstream media? mainstream media? that makes no sense."

Finally, if this doesn't make you smile, then you are dead inside.

And now, the news...

Badgered over human rights. University of Wisconsin-Madison News:

The University of Wisconsin-Madison will end its business relationship with Russell Athletic at the expiration of its current licensing agreement in March....

In late 2008, the university's Labor Licensing Policy Committee (LLPC) recommended that the university end its relationship with the firm after questions arose over the decision to close one of the company's factories, Jerzees de Honduras in Choloma, Honduras.

Human and workers' rights groups have alleged that the closure took place as a result of union-organizing activity, and they cite additional claims that the factory management repeatedly sought to suppress freedoms of association there....

"We are a university that wants to do the best for workers making products bearing our name," says Dawn Crim, special assistant to the chancellor for community relations and liaison to the LLPC. "The company has not met our expectations."

I know that Madison is a hippy-dippy place (Hi Rachel! Hi Neal!). So it is rewarding to see that the university is responding to claims of human rights violations and unfair labor practices. But I think there is more to this story than meets the eye.

Athletics is big business. The NCAA and its member institutions have generally been impervious to what is best for the student, in all cases choosing what is best for the cash. And in this case, Russell products only netted $39,514 for the university in 2007-2008. Even in these hard times, that's chump change for a flagship institution.

A prediction and an expectation: first, look for UW-Madison to replace Russell with a more prominent athletic label such as Nike. And don't expect Nike's human rights record to get in the way of the almighty dollar. And second, shouldn't UW-Madison, and all its departments and employees, stop doing business with Wal-Mart? Wal-Mart's outrageous human rights and labor records are well documented, and certainly worse than Russell's.

D-O-U-C-H-E. USA Today:

Sports are often made for TV. And TV is made for advertisers.

So it shouldn't surprise — especially as all sports are scrambling to find new places to hang "for sale" signs given the current economy — that the NBA's first H-O-R-S-E contest won't use those letters.

As that contest joins dunking and three-point shooting contests as part of TNT's NBA All-Star Weekend coverage, the as-yet unnamed three contestants — who'll be overseen by an NBA ref — will play G-E-I-C-O. As in the insurance company that will be the event's unavoidable sponsor. (Suggestion: The winner then takes on the famous ad lizard to really drive home the brand awareness.)

Really? SRSLY? I already have significant issues with the overlogofication of sports. We're fashion police in professional tennis when it comes to the small number and size of logos we will allow. And in NASCAR, with every single thing covered in logos all the time, how come there have to be commercial breaks? MLS Soccer can broadcast for 45 minutes without interruption - why can't NASCAR?

FanHouse takes this down better than I could:

Look, I understand that the economy stinks that everything needs to be sponsored (this is why Sportscenter has the Coors Light Cold Hard Facts Sponsored by GMC, of course) but at least keep the integrity of the game intact and let it be TNT's HORSE presented by GEICO. Then, instead of selling all our souls, just have a commercial every 12 seconds (fit it in between the Closer, perhaps?) where the gecko and the pile of money with eyes play G-E-I-C-O against each other.

It would have the same effect really, and no one would feel dirty.

A picture is worth a thousand jobs...or more. Daily Kos:


We have a long way to go.

Who, Mii? Engadget:

The sketch artist at the Kanagawa, Japan police department must've been on vaca last week -- local authorities there decided to use this shady-looking Mii to try and catch a man suspected of a hit and run. Crude, yet effective -- although something tells us a man with no arms who can still swing a tennis racket might just stand out on his own.

Are there really enough option in the Mii creator to render an adequate "sketch"? My Mii looks like hell - maybe it's time for me to engage in a crime spree in Kanagawa.

Did you know...that the Pointer Sisters recorded the music for "Pinball Number Count" for Sesame Street in 1972?



You can thank me for having that in your head for the rest of the day.

News You Can Misuse - December 4, 2008

Gays have lost their ways. John Aravosis:

Yeah, the Mormons have only been dropping cash into gay state initiatives for, oh, 15 years now? No one could have predicted that they'd have jumped in again. And the notion of religious conservative use gays to get out the vote in a critical presidential election year, I mean, who's ever hard of that?

Absolutely pathetic. And now we're having "the day without a gay" and postcard campaigns to Obama (yeah, that'll get his attention) because we are a movement of aimless and energized followers with no real leaders. I don't fault the followers for coming up with very sweet but useless ideas. I fault the leaders, in California and in Washington, for permitting this void in smart political leadership to continue year after year.

John and his team at AMERICAblog have been all over the Prop 8 story, from links to the Sundance Film Festival to the "unintended consequences" of donations to the Yes on 8 side to coprorations we should consider avoiding. But today he hits the nail true. Who are our leaders?

Most of us (politically active, bloggers, blog readers) would have no problem naming leaders of the African American equal rights movement - Jesse Jackson, John Lewis, Martin Luther King. What about the women's equal rights movement? Susan B. Anthony, Gloria Steinem, Billie Jean King. Atheists equal rights movement? Madalyn Murray O'Hair.

So who are the leaders of the gay equal rights movement? Can you name anyone? The reason you cannot is because gays and lesbians are not a cohesive group. African Americans, Hispanics, women - they all share certain cultural touchstones that have the potential to strongly unify them in the face of adversity and discrimination. Gays and lesbians share only one thing - one thing that is actually very different for men and for women - and are terribly diverse in every other way. We are every race, religion, party affiliation, and so on. We cannot progress because we cannot unify. Even in the face of a defeat like California, we lack cohesion and rely on temperamental boycotts and stunts like "Day without a Gay". What we need is Obama-style netroots activism. And we need homegrown leaders.

That's why all the folks on Rocky Top get their coal from a jar. Natural Resources Defense Council:

Today, BofA released its revised coal policy, which will have the immediate effect of curtailing commercial lending to companies that mine coal by blowing off the top of mountains. The policy states, in part:

Bank of America is particularly concerned about surface mining conducted through mountain top removal in locations such as central Appalachia. We therefore will phase out financing of companies whose predominant method of extracting coal is through mountain top removal. While we acknowledge that surface mining is economically efficient and creates jobs, it can be conducted in a way that minimizes environmental impacts in certain geographies.

Bank of America has been my least favorite back for years, dating back to experiences in College Station, Texas when I was in graduate school. They charge for everything - they even have accounts that charge you for making a deposit with a teller - and I never feel like I can completely trust them.

Through mergers and acquisitions, BoA has become the largest bank by assets in the United States, and a major financial services company with the purchases of Merrill Lynch and Countrywide Financial. And, for the sake of convenience, I have a local account with them now, too. The branch manager at my local office, a bundle of energy named Greg, is a polite and helpful man, and his effervescence rubs off on everyone else there. It has made me reassess BoA, though I still don't completely trust them. This news, however, is good news.

In 2006, BoA provided nearly 100 times as much financing for heavily polluting energy projects as it did for cleaner alternatives. With the Obama administration hinting at the possibility of a "Green Deal" set of public works projects, BoA and the other major banks should get on board. Government should go further, however, requiring that banks follow a Community Reinvestment Act approach to funding cleaner energy. It would be a good start for the government to provide billions in funding for cleaner energy. It would be great if the private sector would see the benefits of doing the same thing.

(And if you want an idea of what we clean energy proponents are up against, check out the story of how Don Blankenship of Massey Energy tried to buy the West Virginia Supreme Court and legislature, and succeeded in one case.)

There goes the neighborhood. New York Times The Caucus:

As hard as it may be to leave 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, President George W. Bush and First Lady Laura Bush have settled on a new home.

The White House announced today that after the president leaves office next month, the first couple will be moving to the upscale Preston Hollow neighborhood of Dallas....

According to property records on file with the Dallas Central Appraisal District, the home at 10141 Daria Place has a market value of over $2 million. The 8,501 square foot, four-bedroom residence, which includes a cabana and servant’s quarters, was built in 1959 and sits on 1.13 acres.

President and Mrs. George H. W. Bush retired to Houston. He planted his library at Texas A&M University. And now, after convincing Southern Methodist to find some shelf space for his coloring books, George and Laura confirm that they are moving to a wealthy north Dallas neighborhood. From the looks of it, there will be plenty of brush to clear. And, it's less than ten miles to the President George Bush Turnpike:


View Larger Map

These boots were made for charging. Engadget:

Charging your laptop could start to feel a lot more like work in the near future, if the folks at Easy Energy have it their way. They've just completed a protoype for the Yogen Max laptop charger, and though details are particularly spartan about the actual workings of the device, as you can see from the mock-up, it's going to involve a human foot pumping juice directly into your laptop.

Check out the flash. It is as direct as can be. And that energetic woman in the background just compels me to buy...

And finally. North Carolina Department of Agriculture, via Greensboro News-Record:

North Carolina produced nearly 4.8 million poinsettias in 2007 and generated cash receipts of $15.2 million," said Agriculture Commissioner Steve Troxler. "Overall floriculture production contributes more than $194 million to North Carolina’s economy, and poinsettias are a very important part of that.

Just don't let my cats near them.

News You Can Misuse: December 2, 2008

God save the Bluegrass State. Lexington Herald-Leader:

An atheists-rights group is suing the Kentucky Office of Homeland Security because state law requires the agency to stress "dependence on Almighty God as being vital to the security of the Commonwealth."

Edwin Kagin, a Boone County lawyer and the national legal director of American Atheists, said he was appalled to read in the Herald-Leader last week that state law establishes praising God — and installing a plaque in God's honor — as the first duty of the Homeland Security Office.

The requirement to credit God for Kentucky's protection was tucked into 2006 homeland security legislation by state Rep. Tom Riner, D-Louisville, a Southern Baptist minister.

Riner said he expects Homeland Security to include language recognizing God's benevolent protection in its official reports and other materials — sometimes the agency does, and sometimes it doesn't — and to maintain a plaque with that message at the state's Emergency Operations Center in Frankfort.

Yeah, this one is pretty ridiculous. But then again, there are 7,382 state legislators in the United States - there are bound to be a few small-town flakes. And you would think this would be a slam-dunk case. Except the atheists bring the absurdity to a new level.

The plaintiffs ask for the homeland security law to be stripped of its references to God. They also ask for monetary damages, claiming to have suffered sleeping disorders and "mental pain and anguish."

"Plaintiffs also suffer anxiety from the belief that the existence of these unconstitutional laws suggest that their very safety as residents of Kentucky may be in the hands of fanatics, traitors or fools," according to the suit.

The Commonwealth is still fairly red. Flipping Bunning's seat in 2010 may not be that simple after all.

Indict Cheney? Not so fast. Associated Press:

A judge dismissed eight indictments Monday brought by a South Texas prosecutor against high-profile figures including Vice President Dick Cheney, former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and a state senator.

The order by Administrative Judge Manuel Banales ended two weeks of proceedings that some courtroom veterans declared the most bizarre they had ever witnessed.

At first look, it seemed that this rural Texas district attorney might be on to something. Cheney is an investor in the Vanguard Group, an investment management company that has part of its assets in private prison companies. This created a conflict of interest, with Cheney profiting from the growth of detention centers, some of which have been accused of abusing detainees. Gonzales was accused of stifling an investigation into these charges.

The indictments were dismissed on a technicality relating to the composition of the grand jury. But the story of the prosecutor, Willacy County DA Juan Angel Guerra, is more complicated. Guerra himself was under indictment for extortion and corruption for 18 months until Judge Banales cleared him of the charges. Guerra's indictment of Cheney and Gonzales also included indictments of five other local figures who were allegedly behind Guerra's own indictment, and who purportedly interfered to try to stop Guerra's investigation of the private prisons.

Guerra has a recent history of unusual or erratic behavior.

Guerra ran the investigation into alleged prisoner abuse with a siege mentality. He worked it from his home, dubbed it "Operation Goliath" and kept it secret from his staff, he said. He gave all the witnesses biblical pseudonyms — his was "David."

[While under indictment,] Guerra protested in front of the sheriff's office with farm animals and in March lost his re-election bid in a primary.

The judge suggested that Guerra avoid re-presenting these cases before his term expires at the end of the year. Guerra viewed that suggestion as evidence of the judge's complicity in a wide-ranging conspiracy to block his investigation.

"I expected it," Guerra said immediately after the hearing. "The system is going to protect itself."

A coup in Canada. Bloomberg:

Canadian opposition party leaders agreed to try and oust Prime Minister Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s minority Conservative government, signing an accord to work as an alliance until June 30, 2011.

Liberal Party Leader Stephane Dion would lead the government if Harper is defeated, he and other party chiefs said today in Ottawa. The Liberals would have 18 cabinet posts including finance, and the New Democratic Party would get six cabinet jobs.

“We are seeing a sad spectacle from Harper’s government,” Dion said at a press conference in Ottawa after a signing ceremony, flanked by Bloc Quebecois Leader Gilles Duceppe and New Democratic Leader Jack Layton. “We are ready to form a new government that will address the best interests of the people.”

Canada has never been led by a group of opposition parties since it was formed in 1867.

South of the Forty-Eighth, Harper would be called a "loyal Bushie." After his party's re-election two months ago, Harper tried to push through two controversial initiatives - restricting public employee union rights, and ending public campaign financing, a step that would have hit Opposition parties harder. The Opposition called Harper's bluff, and the end of a tumultuous week saw an unlikely alliance of Liberal, NDP, and Bloc Quebecois members to oust Harper.

Parliamentary democracy has its flaws. But can you imagine if this option had been available to Americans in 2005 - or even 2001?

And finally, USC will continue a tradition by wearing their home jerseys when they play at UCLA this weekend. ESPN:

[USC Coach Pete] Carroll said on Monday that the Trojans would wear their cardinal red home jerseys on Saturday at the Rose Bowl. That violates an NCAA rule that requires visiting teams to wear white, and the infraction will cost him two timeouts, one per half.

The last time the Trojans and the Bruins both wore home jerseys -- the Trojans in red, the Bruins in blue and gold -- was in 1982, when the schools shared the Los Angeles Coliseum.

Why is the corrupt and useless NCAA even legislating this, when we get this all the time in college basketball?

An Independence Bowl Primer

So here is what I know about the big game, as of December 1.

The Independence Bowl has tie-ins with the SEC and Big XII Conferences. However, an unusual set of circumstances in 2008 will likely prevent either conference from being represented in the game.

(1) SEC: The SEC has tie-ins with nine bowls. Only eight teams are bowl-eligible (six wins and a non-losing record). And one team - Alabama or Florida - will almost definitely play in the BCS Championship Game (not included in the nine bowl tie-ins). Therefore, the last two bowls on the SEC's selection order list - the Independence Bowl and Papajohns.com Bowl - will not be able to select an SEC team.

(2) Big XII: The Big XII has tie-ins with nine bowls for eight slots. Only seven teams are bowl eligible this year - the fewest since 2004. So the last team on the selection order list - the Texas Bowl - will not get a Big XII team.

The Independence Bowl is seventh on the selection order list. If Oklahoma beats Missouri for the Big XII championship, the Sooners will be promoted to the BCS Championship Game, and the Independence Bowl will lose its Big XII team (which would be Kansas). The same result happens if Missouri wins the Big XII and BCS #3 Texas moves up.

The only way the Independence Bowl gets Kansas is if Missouri wins the Big XII, USC clobbers UCLA, Florida beats Alabama, and USC impresses enough voters and computers to get past the Longhorns in the BCS standings - not likely at all.

(3) Sun Belt: In 2008 and 2009, the Independence Bowl has an agreement with the Sun Belt to choose an eligible team from that conference if either the Big XII or SEC cannot provide a team. This clause will definitely kick in for 2008.

The Sun Belt will have four eligible teams - Troy, Arkansas State, Florida Atlantic, and the winner of the Louisiana-Lafayette v. Middle Tennessee State game. And, for the first time in this post, this is where things get complicated.

In 2006, the NCAA instituted a rule (.pdf) requiring that bowl eligible teams with a winning record be considered before teams with a 6-6 record. This rule does not apply if a bowl has a contract with a conference, as the Independence Bowl does with the Sun Belt Conference.

If Troy defeats Arkansas State, Troy goes to the New Orleans Bowl as the Sun Belt Conference champions. Then, if Louisiana-Lafayette defeats Middle Tennessee State, the Independence Bowl will almost certainly give the Ragin' Cajuns their first bowl bid in school history. But if Middle Tennessee State wins, the Independence Bowl will choose between MTSU, Florida Atlantic, and Arkansas State. Arkansas State, as the closest school and with a victory over Texas A&M to open the season, would be the front-runner.

If Arkansas State defeats Troy, they are conference co-champions, and Arkansas State goes to the New Orleans Bowl on the head-to-head tiebreaker. Then, under the 2006 NCAA bowl rule, the Sun Belt would be required to send 7-5 Troy to the Independence Bowl over 6-6 Florida Atlantic and the 6-6 winner of ULL v. MTSU.

This conference is so tight at the top that it is impossible to predict what will happen here. What is almost certain, however, is that either Troy, Arkansas State, or Louisiana-Lafayette will play in the Independence Bowl.

(4) At-large:There are 68 bowl slots available. At least 72 teams and as many as 74 will be bowl-eligible. In the last three seasons, every BCS conference team that was bowl eligible received a bowl invitation. This means that the WAC, with six eligible teams and only four bowl tie-ins, will likely send Louisiana Tech to the Independence Bowl for their fourth appearance, and first since a 34-34 tie with Maryland in 1990.

There are two dark horses for this at-large spot. The MAC's Western Michigan could land in Shreveport at 9-3. They tied for second in the Western Division with Central Michigan, who beat them. However, Central's season-ending loss to 3-9 Eastern Michigan probably ended the Chippewas' bowl hopes. Also, North Carolina State is the tenth team in the nine-bid ACC. They could be shipped to Shreveport if there are no vacancies in more prestigious bowl games.

The match-up I'd like to see? Louisiana-Lafayette versus Louisiana Tech. Tech leads the series 16-10-3, but the teams haven't played since 2004. The most likely match-up? Arkansas State versus Western Michigan. ASU v. Louisiana Tech was a regular series in the 1990s, and not a very interesting one (Tech leads the series 14-3.) Plus, the only time in the last decade that the Independence Bowl reached out to another conference was in 2004, when the MAC's Miami gave Iowa State a competitive game. And Arkansas State has played Eastern and Central Michigan, but never Western.

(5) Bowl notes: The eligible teams most likely to be left out of the bowls: Bowling Green, Central Michigan, Northern Illinois, Florida Atlantic, San Jose State, and Memphis.

The Big XII and SEC conference championships are also essentially BCS semifinals. Here are the possibilities.

ACC: Boston College or Virginia Tech
Big East: Cincinnati
Big Ten: Penn State
Big XII: Oklahoma or Missouri
Pac-10: Oregon State or USC
SEC: Alabama or Florida
Automatic qualifier: Utah
At-large: Texas
Possible At-large (in order of likelihood): Alabama/Florida loser; Oklahoma (if loses to Missouri); USC (if loses to Oregon State); Ohio State; Boise State

The BCS National Championship will definitely pair the SEC champion against Oklahoma or Texas. (Two exceptions - [1] Poll voters get a conscience about a team that did not win its conference playing for the title. [2] Florida wins the SEC and Oklahoma wins the Big XII, but Florida cannot squeeze past Texas for BCS #2.)

My predictions:
BCS Championship: Alabama v. Oklahoma
Rose Bowl: Penn State v. USC
Sugar Bowl: Florida v. Ohio State
Fiesta Bowl: Texas v. Utah
Orange Bowl: Boston College v. Cincinnati

UPDATE [12/2/08]: Apparently, if Troy loses to Arkansas State, the Indians go to the New Orleans Bowl, and the Trojans are committed to the Papajohns.com Bowl. This probably strengthens the case for a Louisiana Tech-Western Michigan match-up. Even if Louisiana-Lafayette wins their final game, their season record would pale in comparison to these two teams.

RedState's mature approach to politics

Republicans only seem to like the media when it is eating out of their hands. Any outlet that dares to, say, actually do its job faces the wrath of the faithful.

And by wrath, I mean this measured, balanced, and useful approach:

As you know, the magazine Us Weekly will hit news stands this coming weekend with a hit job on Governor Sarah Palin.

Though Us Weekly claims that its coverage is very balanced, its cover features Governor Palin holding a baby with the headline "Babies, Lies, and Scandal."

US Weekly, which has been a promotional vehicle for Senator Obama's campaign, is in the tank for Barack Obama and will stop at nothing to ruin Governor Palin's reputation.

Please consider doing this: When you go to the grocery story this week, pick up a couple of copies of Us Weekly and deposit them on the shelves where the toilet paper is located.

When your party does not have a tradition of community organizers, this is what passes for responsible political action.