Pre-landfall projections, via the NHC
The only positive is the barometer reading (at least as of this writing) is at 958.
It's not much of a upside, but it was 942 a few hours ago. Katrina got down to 902.
Sunday, August 31, 2008
mbar 958
The only positive is the barometer reading (at least as of this writing) is at 958.
It's not much of a upside, but it was 942 a few hours ago. Katrina got down to 902.
Collateral damage
CJR's Joshua Foust delves into the stories behind US forces and civilian casualties in Afghanistan:
Our reputation is taking the hit, regardless - so you would think that some transparency would help our cause.
If there were mistakes, those responsible could be punished. If this is the result of misinformation, that could at least be communicated to those who might be persuaded that we aren't actively trying to kill civilians.
Clamming up and hoping just isn't going to help.
The undisputed facts are fairly sparse: in the early pre-dawn hours of Friday, August 22, a small joint American-Afghan force came under attack in a village called Azizabad, in the Shindand District of southern Herat Province. While offering support to the embattled unit, an AC-130 gunship fired into a cluster of buildings. Beyond this, the facts become murky, even contradictory.It's just maddening to think that this back and forth is all the information we will get on this subject. That there isn't some kind of ongoing process to determine what exactly is happening.
On Saturday, August 23, Voice of America reported that, while Afghan officials complained that the strike had killed “at least 70 people, including women and children,” a U.S. coalition spokesman claimed that a battlefield assessment indicated only thirty Taliban were killed, and that a follow-up investigation was under way.
[snip]
Local officials, including a spokesman for the western regional command of the Afghan National Army, claimed they found the bodies of sixty children and nineteen women among the dead.
[snip]
By Monday, August 25, they were counting the dead in Azizabad: a local human rights group claimed “at least 78 people were killed” during the clashes and the air strike, while the Ministry of Interior claimed seventy-six people died, including fifty children under the age of fifteen.
[snip]
The situation took an altogether different turn by Wednesday, August 27, when the U.N. announced that its own investigation revealed “convincing evidence” that at least ninety civilians, sixty of them children, had died during the Azizabad incident.
[snip]
By Thursday, August 28—six days after the initial incident—the Pentagon leaked its own version of events to The New York Times, claiming that photographs of the scene after the firefight revealed little evidence for a higher civilian death toll, the U.N.’s investigation was cursory, and other reports relied too heavily on the testimony of local villagers rather than physical evidence such as freshly dug graves or injured people in local hospitals. One U.S. military investigation repeats the claim of twenty-five dead insurgents and five dead civilians, but still proposes additional “joint” investigations of the incident—leaving one to wonder what, exactly, they are still investigating.
Our reputation is taking the hit, regardless - so you would think that some transparency would help our cause.
If there were mistakes, those responsible could be punished. If this is the result of misinformation, that could at least be communicated to those who might be persuaded that we aren't actively trying to kill civilians.
Clamming up and hoping just isn't going to help.
Saturday, August 30, 2008
Friday, August 29, 2008
What he said
There's a lot of buzz about Obama's speech last night - but TPM has a telling review from none other than GOP consultant Alex Castellanos
Yeah. Obama was hitting the right buttons.
Yeah. Obama was hitting the right buttons.
McCain picks Palin
Reuters: McCain's Veep is Palin
A tactical choice (as they all are) but any novelty of her age and gender are offset by her being second fiddle to Sen. McCain.
Late edit:
Josh Marshall points out her youth and inexperience undercuts McCain's "experienced" mantra.
A tactical choice (as they all are) but any novelty of her age and gender are offset by her being second fiddle to Sen. McCain.
Late edit:
Josh Marshall points out her youth and inexperience undercuts McCain's "experienced" mantra.
The virtues of paper & pencil
(via the DailyWTF)
Proof that there's virtue in the old way of doing things:
Back in 1993 - at an unspecified River City High School - a test taking program was installed on school computers. It was called Classroom Assistant.
This:
Priceless.
Proof that there's virtue in the old way of doing things:
Back in 1993 - at an unspecified River City High School - a test taking program was installed on school computers. It was called Classroom Assistant.
To create a new test, all teachers would have to do was write up a bunch of questions and then “deploy” them to each of the classroom’s PCs. Because Classroom Assistant wasn’t a networked product, deploying the tests involved taking the 3.5" disk containing the test questions and then loading the disk into each computer.What could go wrong?
Taking the “digital” tests was even easier. A student would simply select the appropriate test from the “test library”, run through the randomly selected questions, and then instantly see her results. She’d then raise her hand, and the teacher could then write down the test results as seen on the screen.
This:
[Students] could simply CTRL-C to DOS, navigate to the appropriate test folder, and then type in the following at the prompt:
This would overwrite the particular test’s answer key, ensuring that C was, in fact, always the correct answer. Some students even patched together a batch file that overwrote all answer keys for all tests.ECHO CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC > answer.key
Shortly thereafter, River City High moved back to the paper and pencil tests.
Priceless.
Thursday, August 28, 2008
Q.E.D.
For anyone still smarting from Phil Gramm telling us the economic downturn is all in our heads - John Goodman (President of National Center for Policy Analysis) would like to blow your mind (emphasis mine):
There's a mind that should be in government: If I have no solution for a problem - I pretend it doesn't exist.
47 million people swept under the rug. Something tells me they won't be content to stay there.
(H/t E and the HealthCare Blog)
Mr. Goodman, who helped craft Sen. John McCain's health care policy, said anyone with access to an emergency room effectively has insurance, albeit the government acts as the payer of last resort. (Hospital emergency rooms by law cannot turn away a patient in need of immediate care.)So, all you people in the ERs of America... cheer up! You may not have access to preventative medicine - but Mr. Goodman says you've had insurance all along! And since you have insurance - the government is free to ignore you.
"So I have a solution. And it will cost not one thin dime," Mr. Goodman said. "The next president of the United States should sign an executive order requiring the Census Bureau to cease and desist from describing any American – even illegal aliens – as uninsured. Instead, the bureau should categorize people according to the likely source of payment should they need care.
"So, there you have it. Voila! Problem solved."
There's a mind that should be in government: If I have no solution for a problem - I pretend it doesn't exist.
47 million people swept under the rug. Something tells me they won't be content to stay there.
(H/t E and the HealthCare Blog)
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Cutting off your nose to spite your face
CJR has me recalling one of my grandpa's favorite rhymes
The polls, Hillary's withdrawal... not even her speech last night are enough to convince them that this issue was a phantom. Progressive voters will vote for Obama for the same reason that disgruntled evangelical voters will vote for McCain: because they are the lesser of two evils.
The handwringing over McCain's religious bona fides is just as pointless an issue.
Can we discuss Ohio? or who's money is going into who's campaign and with what expectations?
Something that means something for a damn change?
Last night upon the stair,Justin Peters details media struggling in vain to isolate the disgruntled Hillary partisans at the Democratic Convention.
I saw a man who wasn't there.
He wasn't there again today.
My God, I wish he'd go away
After the last night’s speech, journalists were apparently clustered around the New York delegation, going person to person, trying to find one of the vaunted Obama refuseniks. No dice. “The whole idea seems to have come from pundits,” Gabe said. (I’m paraphrasing.) “They erected their own straw man, and then they brought it down. And it never existed in the first place.”Even accepting that some Hillary supporters are now willing to vote for McCain, you have to question reporters who keep this issue on life support.
The polls, Hillary's withdrawal... not even her speech last night are enough to convince them that this issue was a phantom. Progressive voters will vote for Obama for the same reason that disgruntled evangelical voters will vote for McCain: because they are the lesser of two evils.
The handwringing over McCain's religious bona fides is just as pointless an issue.
Can we discuss Ohio? or who's money is going into who's campaign and with what expectations?
Something that means something for a damn change?
Bates flirts with snark
(H/t Emptywheel)
D.C. Judge Bates rejected the administration's request for a stay of his order (telling Harriet Miers and Joshua Bolten comply with House subpoenas).
He doesn't quite rise up to full blown snark, but there is a palpable sense of exasperation in his tone:
There is no appeal to an order that is not final - so it will be interesting to see what kind of brinksmanship ensues. Could be an interesting windout.
D.C. Judge Bates rejected the administration's request for a stay of his order (telling Harriet Miers and Joshua Bolten comply with House subpoenas).
He doesn't quite rise up to full blown snark, but there is a palpable sense of exasperation in his tone:
The Executive’s argument boils down to a claim that a stay is appropriate because the underlying issue is important. But that is beside the point and does not demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits. Simply calling an issue important -- primarily because it involves the relationship of the political branches -- does not transform the Executive’s weak arguments into a likelihood of success or a substantial appellate issue.Still, good vintage though.
There is no appeal to an order that is not final - so it will be interesting to see what kind of brinksmanship ensues. Could be an interesting windout.
It's only funny because its true...
This headline from Emptywheel:
Ted Kennedy with Brain Cancer, on (Probably) Morphine, and in Excruciating Pain Can STILL Read a Teleprompter Better than McCainFull post
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
Don't know much about Georgia
If you're like me - the South Ossetia/ Georgia thing is a bit murky.
DangerRoom's Noah Shachtman says the popular account is totally wrong.
The account he cites (that of Michael J. Totten) is a very interesting counterpoint.
DangerRoom's Noah Shachtman says the popular account is totally wrong.
The account he cites (that of Michael J. Totten) is a very interesting counterpoint.
I didn't leave the networks - the networks left me
ABC News' Jonann Brady - putting another nail in the coffin of Amerian Political coverage
I know there's a lot of signal to fill up in the media these days but really, is this the best Ms. Brady can do?
While it is perhaps the most obvious observation - I'm still waiting for ABC's clothing retrospective for the two presumptive presidential nominees.
Lara Logan had it right. I'm sticking to the BBC and PBS.
(H/t to E)
I know there's a lot of signal to fill up in the media these days but really, is this the best Ms. Brady can do?
During Clinton's historic run for president, not only were her positions on big issues analyzed, so too, was her appearance. The media occasionally mocked her proclivity for the pantsuit, and even fashion mavens like Donatella Versace weighed in on Clinton's wardrobe choices.Is there anything less relevant than a clothing critique for someone who is no longer running for president?
While it is perhaps the most obvious observation - I'm still waiting for ABC's clothing retrospective for the two presumptive presidential nominees.
Lara Logan had it right. I'm sticking to the BBC and PBS.
(H/t to E)
Monday, August 25, 2008
The best health care in the world
CJR's Trudy Lieberman brings us two more case studies in health care.
Lieberman's first case study was
Reading any one of these examples illustrates how inadequate the coverage of this issue has been (which is no doubt Ms. Lieberman's point). The networks have served up softball questions and the campaigns have responded with pat answers.
What I've read indicates that while Obama wants more people to have insurance – he's given us no reason to believe that that coverage will elevate the lives of the newly insured.
By contrast, McCain's plan of severing insurance from employer-sponsored benefit is tantamount to throwing hard to insure Americans to the wolves.
In my own limited experience, past employers negotiated insurance terms with insurers. The size of their business (and overall health of the worker pool) translated into leverage. My past insurers wanted a pool of business brought to them by my employer – so they made some concessions.
I didn't go to those negotiations; my HR person did on my behalf. They took their years of experience with employee benefits and fought for good terms.
As I read it, McCain would make us all lone wolves. Suddenly, I'll have to negotiate with the insurers. I am not an expert and I have no leverage. Is there any real expectation that those negotiations will be unlike all the other negotiations lone consumers have with large corporations?
They give you a number – and you take it or leave it.
This is so insane as to be beyond irresponsible.
If I were a one-issue voter on health care, my vote for Obama would have nothing to do with his fig leaf of a plan – it would be about preventing the disaster that McCain is advocating
- Annette Murph (no relation)
- Kevin A. Smith
Lieberman's first case study was
Reading any one of these examples illustrates how inadequate the coverage of this issue has been (which is no doubt Ms. Lieberman's point). The networks have served up softball questions and the campaigns have responded with pat answers.
What I've read indicates that while Obama wants more people to have insurance – he's given us no reason to believe that that coverage will elevate the lives of the newly insured.
By contrast, McCain's plan of severing insurance from employer-sponsored benefit is tantamount to throwing hard to insure Americans to the wolves.
In my own limited experience, past employers negotiated insurance terms with insurers. The size of their business (and overall health of the worker pool) translated into leverage. My past insurers wanted a pool of business brought to them by my employer – so they made some concessions.
I didn't go to those negotiations; my HR person did on my behalf. They took their years of experience with employee benefits and fought for good terms.
As I read it, McCain would make us all lone wolves. Suddenly, I'll have to negotiate with the insurers. I am not an expert and I have no leverage. Is there any real expectation that those negotiations will be unlike all the other negotiations lone consumers have with large corporations?
They give you a number – and you take it or leave it.
This is so insane as to be beyond irresponsible.
If I were a one-issue voter on health care, my vote for Obama would have nothing to do with his fig leaf of a plan – it would be about preventing the disaster that McCain is advocating
Tit for tat
In reading Emptywheel's post on the NYT article on the loss of WMD evidence, one aside really jumped out at me.
Back in 2004 - the Pakistanis are in hot water over the A.Q. Kahn mess - (Kahn helps other countries build nuclear bomb technology, is publicly arrested, and privately given his freedom). The US makes numerous statements defending Pakistan.
The US puts those statements on then-Pakistani President Musharraf's account. You owe us.
And what are they asking in return?
Obviously not a new story, but a vivid illustration of how power can be misused in an election year.
We are fortunate that this is not a re-election year for the president, or we might see some other flavor of this nonsense.
Back in 2004 - the Pakistanis are in hot water over the A.Q. Kahn mess - (Kahn helps other countries build nuclear bomb technology, is publicly arrested, and privately given his freedom). The US makes numerous statements defending Pakistan.
The US puts those statements on then-Pakistani President Musharraf's account. You owe us.
And what are they asking in return?
But the Bush administration apparently conveyed to the Pakistani military after that episode that it now expected the Musharraf regime to deliver high-ranking al Qaeda officials — and to do so at a particularly advantageous moment for the administration. The New Republic magazine reported Jul. 15, 2004 that a White House aide had told the visiting head of ISI, Ehsan ul-Haq, that “it would be best if the arrest or killing of any HVT [high value target] were announced on 26, 27 or 28 July.” Those were the last three days of the Democratic National Convention.
[snip]
Just hours before Democratic candidate John Kerry’s acceptance speech, Pakistan announced the capture of an alleged al Qaeda leader.
Obviously not a new story, but a vivid illustration of how power can be misused in an election year.
We are fortunate that this is not a re-election year for the president, or we might see some other flavor of this nonsense.
Saturday, August 23, 2008
Simulacrum
Looks like the programmers over at Image Metrics (of GTA fame) have managed to make a human CGI that (when blurred) looks pretty damn real.
The real question is, how agile is this? You can do anything for a demo (especially if you blur the lens) but being able to put this construct into an environment and move the camera is quite another.
Still… the mannerisms are pretty impressive.
(H/t Neatorama)
The real question is, how agile is this? You can do anything for a demo (especially if you blur the lens) but being able to put this construct into an environment and move the camera is quite another.
Still… the mannerisms are pretty impressive.
(H/t Neatorama)
Friday, August 22, 2008
Homeland security
The nice people over at the DHS (the folks in charge of keeping us all safe) have something to share:
(Although, since it was a FEMA phone system - I suppose I should say "Heckuva job, guys!")
(Via C|net news)
Someone hacked into a U.S. Homeland Security Department phone system and made 400 calls to the Middle East and Asia, racking up $12,000 in long-distance charges, The Associated Press reported.Way to go, guys.
(Although, since it was a FEMA phone system - I suppose I should say "Heckuva job, guys!")
(Via C|net news)
Survivor's guilt
The day before our kitchen remodel got the green light, I received a meeting invite from boss.
A 4pm invite for a meeting the following day.
I check the invite list – the meeting is for all the consultants.
Sh!t
In CorpWorld, this is a very bad thing.
Historically, sudden team meetings with the boss have been announcements that someone has gotten canned.
This time – the vibe is different. The meeting is to "quell the rumors." The phrase mandates my next action:
I go hunting for rumors.
Now, I'm a pretty dull guy. I have no interest in CorpWorld politics – give me my assignment and tell me who I work with. I blunder into a lot of minefields – but I find you can get a lot done if you ignore factions and just work the problem.
That kind of willful ignorance has its price: being invited to meetings about rumors you've never heard of.
CorpWorld doesn't have a grapevine so much as it has a fire hose of pessimism.
Things are awful! Can you believe how awful things are?
That it never strays from this mantra is why it's so easy to ignore.
I tap in for five minutes and get about ten different anecdotes. Most are crap, but the subtext is unmistakable.
The boss is talking about layoffs. Figures.
CorpWorld is having re-org spasms and one of the side effects is that they are pausing to get a grip on all they are trying to do. Analyzing everything in the pipeline means stopping the pipeline.
And stopped pipelines provide precious little work for people downstream.
Me? I'm downstream.
Sh!t
----
Meeting day, fifteen minutes before the appointed time.
We're all early. In a department as chronically tardy as ours, this says a lot about where people's nerves are. We cluster up: gallows humor to the left, shell-shocked to the right.
There are few things as depressing as a hallway full of professionals waiting for someone to pronounce sentence on them. Some of these people have PhD's, and they look like they are being sent to the principal's office.
The boss arrives, we file into our chairs and brace.
The news is scant – the implications dire.
If work continues to be slow – I will not be able to justify our current staffing level.
That's pretty much the entire meeting. We prolong the agony with a few more questions - I ask if there is a timeline - but there are no more facts to be found.
Rather than squirm through more pointless questioning, I begin demonstrative body language that says "Meeting OVER" and start edging for the door.
Eventually the notion catches on. We leave the room.
The trouble merchants in the group invent sub-plots and begin hand wringing in earnest. Did some of us know more than others? Who knew what? And when?
Knowing nothing means I get to skip this discussion.
I go back to work.
---
Career consultants, this comes with the territory. Résumés are updated regularly, and leases are month to month.
There is a surge of activity on LinkedIn and then "Farewell and Thanks" messages start showing up every few days.
Someone I can't remember sends: It's been great! I'll never forget you guys!
-And I have this terrible sense of relief.
There are too many of us, and some of us have consented to go.
When the involuntary exits begin – perhaps there will not need to be so many.
---
That's actually what got me started today. This morning, the cube next to me was occupied by a nice person who I've sat next to for almost a year now.
The boss came by to tell me that I should not be alarmed when the box people come.
The box people are the ones who collect all your belongings when you've been locked out of the building.
Nice person has been fired.
-and cad that I am, I have this terrible sense of relief.
A 4pm invite for a meeting the following day.
I check the invite list – the meeting is for all the consultants.
Sh!t
In CorpWorld, this is a very bad thing.
Historically, sudden team meetings with the boss have been announcements that someone has gotten canned.
This time – the vibe is different. The meeting is to "quell the rumors." The phrase mandates my next action:
I go hunting for rumors.
Now, I'm a pretty dull guy. I have no interest in CorpWorld politics – give me my assignment and tell me who I work with. I blunder into a lot of minefields – but I find you can get a lot done if you ignore factions and just work the problem.
That kind of willful ignorance has its price: being invited to meetings about rumors you've never heard of.
CorpWorld doesn't have a grapevine so much as it has a fire hose of pessimism.
Things are awful! Can you believe how awful things are?
That it never strays from this mantra is why it's so easy to ignore.
I tap in for five minutes and get about ten different anecdotes. Most are crap, but the subtext is unmistakable.
The boss is talking about layoffs. Figures.
CorpWorld is having re-org spasms and one of the side effects is that they are pausing to get a grip on all they are trying to do. Analyzing everything in the pipeline means stopping the pipeline.
And stopped pipelines provide precious little work for people downstream.
Me? I'm downstream.
Sh!t
----
Meeting day, fifteen minutes before the appointed time.
We're all early. In a department as chronically tardy as ours, this says a lot about where people's nerves are. We cluster up: gallows humor to the left, shell-shocked to the right.
There are few things as depressing as a hallway full of professionals waiting for someone to pronounce sentence on them. Some of these people have PhD's, and they look like they are being sent to the principal's office.
The boss arrives, we file into our chairs and brace.
The news is scant – the implications dire.
If work continues to be slow – I will not be able to justify our current staffing level.
That's pretty much the entire meeting. We prolong the agony with a few more questions - I ask if there is a timeline - but there are no more facts to be found.
Rather than squirm through more pointless questioning, I begin demonstrative body language that says "Meeting OVER" and start edging for the door.
Eventually the notion catches on. We leave the room.
The trouble merchants in the group invent sub-plots and begin hand wringing in earnest. Did some of us know more than others? Who knew what? And when?
Knowing nothing means I get to skip this discussion.
I go back to work.
---
Career consultants, this comes with the territory. Résumés are updated regularly, and leases are month to month.
There is a surge of activity on LinkedIn and then "Farewell and Thanks" messages start showing up every few days.
Someone I can't remember sends: It's been great! I'll never forget you guys!
-And I have this terrible sense of relief.
There are too many of us, and some of us have consented to go.
When the involuntary exits begin – perhaps there will not need to be so many.
---
That's actually what got me started today. This morning, the cube next to me was occupied by a nice person who I've sat next to for almost a year now.
The boss came by to tell me that I should not be alarmed when the box people come.
The box people are the ones who collect all your belongings when you've been locked out of the building.
Nice person has been fired.
-and cad that I am, I have this terrible sense of relief.
Thursday, August 21, 2008
Vindication
For a team that started as badly as this one - this has got to feel pretty damn good.
Everyone doubted them. There was no Abby. A new coach. Brasil has the two best players on the planet.
Yeah, well - we had Carli Lloyd in the 96th minute (and damn near again in the 115th minute). What's more we had Hope Solo at the top of her game.
Cristiane? Stuffed. Marta? Shut out.
You couldn't have set up a better final. A straight up, unadulterated win for the US women.
Bask in it, wallow in it. The US women are Olympic Champions.
Scoreline - August 21, 2008
Brasil: 0
USA: 1
Lloyd 96'
Scoooooooreboard....ScoOOooooOOOooreboard!!!
Everyone doubted them. There was no Abby. A new coach. Brasil has the two best players on the planet.
Yeah, well - we had Carli Lloyd in the 96th minute (and damn near again in the 115th minute). What's more we had Hope Solo at the top of her game.
Coach Ryan? You seein' this?
Cristiane? Stuffed. Marta? Shut out.
You couldn't have set up a better final. A straight up, unadulterated win for the US women.
Bask in it, wallow in it. The US women are Olympic Champions.
God bless America
Scoreline - August 21, 2008
Brasil: 0
USA: 1
Lloyd 96'
The four stages of McCain's real estate response
(via WaPo)
The McCain campaign responding to reports that McCain owns 7 or more houses:
1 - Denial:
2 - Everybody does it:
3 - Change the subject
4 - Pfffffbbbbt!
Talk about elevating the debate.
The McCain campaign responding to reports that McCain owns 7 or more houses:
1 - Denial:
The reality is they have some investment properties and stuff. It's not as if he lives in ten houses. That's just not the case," Rogers said. "The reality is they have four that actually could be considered houses they could use."No, he doesn't live in ten houses. He just owns ten houses. See?
2 - Everybody does it:
[the press] should focus on Obama's house. "It's a frickin' mansion."Our opponent has a nice house, why can't McCain have ten?
3 - Change the subject
"This is a guy who lived in one house for five and a half years -- in prison," referring to the prisoner of war camp that McCain was in during the Vietnam War.I cannot be rich, because once I was poor.
4 - Pfffffbbbbt!
John McCain is not an arugula-eating, pointy headed professor-type based on his life story.I'm rubber, you're glue...!
Talk about elevating the debate.
FISA's slippery slope
bmaz on Emptywheel goes to town on FISA's latest upchuck:
(Full post)
Here, courtesy of the New York Times, is the new joy the Attorney General is announcing to "protect yer freedums":God bless America.
A Justice Department plan would loosen restrictions on the Federal Bureau of Investigation to allow agents to open a national security or criminal investigation against someone without any clear basis for suspicion, Democratic lawmakers briefed on the details said Wednesday.
...
The senators said the new guidelines would allow the F.B.I. to open an investigation of an American, conduct surveillance, pry into private records and take other investigative steps “without any basis for suspicion.” The plan “might permit an innocent American to be subjected to such intrusive surveillance based in part on race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, or on protected First Amendment activities,” the letter said. It was signed by Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts and Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island. (emphasis added)
(Full post)
Lehman... you're not looking so good
(Via Reuters)
But these days, there's a lot of nay to say.
The outlook for Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc darkened further on Thursday as a newspaper reported that an intended asset sale had collapsed and a Citigroup analyst forecast big losses for the group.I know, I'm a naysayer.
The fourth-largest U.S. investment bank has taken a $7 billion hit from credit-related writedowns and losses since the start of the global crisis and is forecast to write down more.
Lehman is concerned its capital cushion is not enough to absorb losses, and people close to the matter said this week it is considering selling at least a part of its asset management business.
But these days, there's a lot of nay to say.
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Cage match
I so F-ing hate Guatamala.
Not the country, just everyone and everything associated with playing their soccer team. I'll grant that their national team has talent, but a World Cup qualifier in Guatemala is just a different beast entirely.
I'll start with the sidelines. Any time you have fences with barbed wire - you know the home crowd is not the welcoming type.
This is the country where the fans injured Alexi Lalas by throwing batteries at his head.
Next, the refs. I'm sure I'm biased, but I've noticed a certain willingness of CONCACAF refs to indulge Latin America's desire to avenge themselves on the Yanquis. Not to pick on Alexi, but in another qualifying match, I watched a Guatemalan player walk up to Lalas and flat out punch him in the testicles.
No card, not even a foul.
Lastly the Guatemalan national team players. When Alexi did get punched in the nads, he was surrounded by Guatemalan players. They were trying to block the ref's view. Soccer has some pretty draconian rules for deliberately injuring a player - yet somehow Guatemalan players view every match against the US as open season.
The fact that more of their players aren't ejected leads me to believe that CONCACAFs refs feel the same way.
Historically, the US has never won in Guatemala. At least on goals. Winning in Guatemala is getting out alive - and with the fewest number of injuries possible. There's no question the US team tries to prep for the environment - rather like civil rights protestors:
Cherundulo picked up his first yellow by spiking a dead ball in anger. This is tantamount to asking "Ref? Would you please card me?"
What ref could resist that? So Cherundolo gets booked for a stupid foul. The ref then went on a tear of bad non-calls (Eddie Lewis getting shoved over the corner flag and into the barricade. No foul.) and BS yellow cards for Dempsey and Mastroeni.
Mastroeni's was for a garden variety foul, but Dempsey's was a work of art.
Guatamala's Ramirez gets dispossessed by Dempsey and after the play slaps him upside the head. Dempsey flips his arms out like "back off, pal" and Ramirez goes down like he's been stabbed.
Ramirez grabs his head, goes fetal and writhes on the ground. It was comical right up until the ref walked over and carded Dempsey and Ramirez.
The US didn't get all the bad calls. Guatemala had two golden opportunities taken away by bogus offsides and a foul that was a clear advantage call. The common thread though was - the ref was missing stuff - and the Guatemalans were trying to get away with anything they could.
Getting whacked on without the ref bothering to care can wear on you - and Cherundulo reached his limit after an hour. After battling for posession with Freddy Garcia and getting shoved to the ground - Cherundulo opted to get some payback. He grabbed for Garcia's feet just as the Guatemalan turned to break - tripping him.
Deliberate attempt to trip - with his hands - right in front of the ref. Second yellow. Red card. Gone.
This is exactly where you don't want to be: A man down, on the road, in Guatemala. They've been controlling the match, getting the better chances and now they have a man advantage.
The crowd is going insane.They feel it - the momentum is on their side.
They want blood.
Three minutes later, they get it. Eddie Lewis who has been getting abused for over an hour, leaps into the air to get a head on a deep goal kick.
He doesn't see Gustavo Cabrerra flying towards him. There is a sickening impact and Lewis' body whips around and crumples into a heap. He's got blood all over his forehead and looks dazed.
Cabrerra is down too, and the early replay makes it look like this is another of those head-meets-head collisions that happen all too often on high balls.
The stretcher goes in for Lewis and you can see them sponging him off to find where the cut is. It's over his eye - but it looks like Lewis is just out of it.
Then they show the second replay. Cabrerra airborne - the two players pinwheeling after their heads collide. The impact causes commentator John Harkes to exclaim "Oh my God."
-and then they show the third replay - the one that shows Cabrerra leaving the ground, headed towards Lewis-
-and he's leading with his elbow.
Yeah. Cabrerra saw an opportunity to collide with an American and tried to maximize the injury. After the hit he's rolling around in the hopes that he masked the hit well enough to get away with it.
I'm tempted to say that stuff like this is the reason I F-ing hate Guatemala - but this isn't even the worst of it. That came later.
To his credit the Surinam ref saw what happend and gives Cabrerra the very least he deserves - a straight red.
Cabrerra out. The teams are level at ten men- but Lewis is leaving the field on a stretcher.
What came next is why I F-ing hate Guatemala:
They're treating Eddie Lewis on the sidelines for a head injury. A bad one. One the whole goddamned crowd saw. He's holding a bandage to his head and the trainers are checking him for signs of a concussion -
-and he has to be flanked by security personnel with riot shields so he isn't hit by something thrown out of the stands.
No shit. Two guys with riot shields have to cover Lewis the whole time he's being treated. When the decision to sub him out finally happens, security escorts him all the way to the tunnel - so the crowd can't injure him more.
That's why.
----
At this point - we have Cherundulo out for two yellows. Lewis out for a head injury.
And the game goes on.
Bradley's decision to swap in Beasley and Hejduk in place of Dempsey and Lewis turns out to be brilliant. Their speed and aggression start to win back control of the midfield.
And then fortune smiles ever so briefly. A foul in the Guatemalan end results in a corner - and Beasley curls a floating kick to a shockingly unmarked Bocanegra.
Header. Goal.
It's the Yanqui's turn to strut - and they do. The crowd is seething, and the Americans are lapping it up. There's even a small contingent of American fans who (in defiance of all common sense) have busted out the Stars and Stripes and are screaming their fool heads off.
Guatemala is pissed and it shows. More aggression, better attacking, they want to stay undefeated at home. The US is starting to cede the field to them. They pack the defense and try to weather the assault.
And it just keeps going on... shot after shot. Miss, save, lucky foul. The US is barely holding on.
Mastroeni gets subbed out after a crushing tackle.
Late in the 83'rd, Guatemalan striker Carlos Ruiz gets a break on goal, but Tim Howard grabs the ball.
Naturally, Ruiz kicks Howard in the head. Howard drops the ball and the Guatemalans kick it into the net.
-But the foul was called and there is no goal. The Guatemalans are incensed - How dare you??!!
Meanwhile, Howard is down, shaking off the hit. When he does get up Gonzales Romero starts talking smack. Howard leaps to his feet points right at Romero and starts venting in earnest.
Naturally, he gets carded. Ruiz and Romero get nothing and they fall back to receive the goal kick.
---
The last eleven minutes (yes, four minutes of excruciating injury time) are just a shooting gallery. Howard's scrambling - defenders flying everywhere. Somewhere in all the chaos - the whistle blows.
In defiance of history, brutality and waves of human hate - The US has gotten out of Guatemala with three points.
Scoreline - August 21, 2008
Guatemala: 0
USA: 1
Bocanegra 69'
Thank god we're not coming back for four years.
Not the country, just everyone and everything associated with playing their soccer team. I'll grant that their national team has talent, but a World Cup qualifier in Guatemala is just a different beast entirely.
I'll start with the sidelines. Any time you have fences with barbed wire - you know the home crowd is not the welcoming type.
This is the country where the fans injured Alexi Lalas by throwing batteries at his head.
Next, the refs. I'm sure I'm biased, but I've noticed a certain willingness of CONCACAF refs to indulge Latin America's desire to avenge themselves on the Yanquis. Not to pick on Alexi, but in another qualifying match, I watched a Guatemalan player walk up to Lalas and flat out punch him in the testicles.
No card, not even a foul.
Lastly the Guatemalan national team players. When Alexi did get punched in the nads, he was surrounded by Guatemalan players. They were trying to block the ref's view. Soccer has some pretty draconian rules for deliberately injuring a player - yet somehow Guatemalan players view every match against the US as open season.
The fact that more of their players aren't ejected leads me to believe that CONCACAFs refs feel the same way.
Historically, the US has never won in Guatemala. At least on goals. Winning in Guatemala is getting out alive - and with the fewest number of injuries possible. There's no question the US team tries to prep for the environment - rather like civil rights protestors:
They are trying to provoke you. Don't let them.Meet a guy who didn't take that advice: Steve Cherundolo
Yeah, he looks like a dork - but don't worry: he'll be ejected in the 60th minute.
Cherundulo picked up his first yellow by spiking a dead ball in anger. This is tantamount to asking "Ref? Would you please card me?"
What ref could resist that? So Cherundolo gets booked for a stupid foul. The ref then went on a tear of bad non-calls (Eddie Lewis getting shoved over the corner flag and into the barricade. No foul.) and BS yellow cards for Dempsey and Mastroeni.
Mastroeni's was for a garden variety foul, but Dempsey's was a work of art.
Guatamala's Ramirez gets dispossessed by Dempsey and after the play slaps him upside the head. Dempsey flips his arms out like "back off, pal" and Ramirez goes down like he's been stabbed.
Ramirez grabs his head, goes fetal and writhes on the ground. It was comical right up until the ref walked over and carded Dempsey and Ramirez.
The US didn't get all the bad calls. Guatemala had two golden opportunities taken away by bogus offsides and a foul that was a clear advantage call. The common thread though was - the ref was missing stuff - and the Guatemalans were trying to get away with anything they could.
Getting whacked on without the ref bothering to care can wear on you - and Cherundulo reached his limit after an hour. After battling for posession with Freddy Garcia and getting shoved to the ground - Cherundulo opted to get some payback. He grabbed for Garcia's feet just as the Guatemalan turned to break - tripping him.
Deliberate attempt to trip - with his hands - right in front of the ref. Second yellow. Red card. Gone.
This is exactly where you don't want to be: A man down, on the road, in Guatemala. They've been controlling the match, getting the better chances and now they have a man advantage.
The crowd is going insane.They feel it - the momentum is on their side.
They want blood.
Three minutes later, they get it. Eddie Lewis who has been getting abused for over an hour, leaps into the air to get a head on a deep goal kick.
He doesn't see Gustavo Cabrerra flying towards him. There is a sickening impact and Lewis' body whips around and crumples into a heap. He's got blood all over his forehead and looks dazed.
Cabrerra is down too, and the early replay makes it look like this is another of those head-meets-head collisions that happen all too often on high balls.
The stretcher goes in for Lewis and you can see them sponging him off to find where the cut is. It's over his eye - but it looks like Lewis is just out of it.
Then they show the second replay. Cabrerra airborne - the two players pinwheeling after their heads collide. The impact causes commentator John Harkes to exclaim "Oh my God."
-and then they show the third replay - the one that shows Cabrerra leaving the ground, headed towards Lewis-
-and he's leading with his elbow.
Yeah. Cabrerra saw an opportunity to collide with an American and tried to maximize the injury. After the hit he's rolling around in the hopes that he masked the hit well enough to get away with it.
I'm tempted to say that stuff like this is the reason I F-ing hate Guatemala - but this isn't even the worst of it. That came later.
To his credit the Surinam ref saw what happend and gives Cabrerra the very least he deserves - a straight red.
Cabrerra out. The teams are level at ten men- but Lewis is leaving the field on a stretcher.
What came next is why I F-ing hate Guatemala:
They're treating Eddie Lewis on the sidelines for a head injury. A bad one. One the whole goddamned crowd saw. He's holding a bandage to his head and the trainers are checking him for signs of a concussion -
-and he has to be flanked by security personnel with riot shields so he isn't hit by something thrown out of the stands.
No shit. Two guys with riot shields have to cover Lewis the whole time he's being treated. When the decision to sub him out finally happens, security escorts him all the way to the tunnel - so the crowd can't injure him more.
That's why.
----
At this point - we have Cherundulo out for two yellows. Lewis out for a head injury.
And the game goes on.
Bradley's decision to swap in Beasley and Hejduk in place of Dempsey and Lewis turns out to be brilliant. Their speed and aggression start to win back control of the midfield.
And then fortune smiles ever so briefly. A foul in the Guatemalan end results in a corner - and Beasley curls a floating kick to a shockingly unmarked Bocanegra.
Header. Goal.
Suck it, Guatemala.
It's the Yanqui's turn to strut - and they do. The crowd is seething, and the Americans are lapping it up. There's even a small contingent of American fans who (in defiance of all common sense) have busted out the Stars and Stripes and are screaming their fool heads off.
Guatemala is pissed and it shows. More aggression, better attacking, they want to stay undefeated at home. The US is starting to cede the field to them. They pack the defense and try to weather the assault.
And it just keeps going on... shot after shot. Miss, save, lucky foul. The US is barely holding on.
Mastroeni gets subbed out after a crushing tackle.
Late in the 83'rd, Guatemalan striker Carlos Ruiz gets a break on goal, but Tim Howard grabs the ball.
Naturally, Ruiz kicks Howard in the head. Howard drops the ball and the Guatemalans kick it into the net.
-But the foul was called and there is no goal. The Guatemalans are incensed - How dare you??!!
Meanwhile, Howard is down, shaking off the hit. When he does get up Gonzales Romero starts talking smack. Howard leaps to his feet points right at Romero and starts venting in earnest.
Naturally, he gets carded. Ruiz and Romero get nothing and they fall back to receive the goal kick.
---
The last eleven minutes (yes, four minutes of excruciating injury time) are just a shooting gallery. Howard's scrambling - defenders flying everywhere. Somewhere in all the chaos - the whistle blows.
In defiance of history, brutality and waves of human hate - The US has gotten out of Guatemala with three points.
Scoreline - August 21, 2008
Guatemala: 0
USA: 1
Bocanegra 69'
Thank god we're not coming back for four years.
So that's how they do it...
If you ever spent time wondering how The Daily Show gets their video clips for their show - Crave blog has the answer: TiVo.
Rather, 15 TiVos and a sneakernet.
Well, at least it isn't a series of tubes...
Rather, 15 TiVos and a sneakernet.
Well, at least it isn't a series of tubes...
Dr. Rachel gets her own show
Dr. Rachel Maddow gets her own TV show.
Yeah, it's MSNBC - so its not like they set the bar very high. I mean, Dan Abrams had a show. Still, nice to see a smart and entertaining person get recognized.
Here's hoping she can do some good.
(H/t CJR)
Yeah, it's MSNBC - so its not like they set the bar very high. I mean, Dan Abrams had a show. Still, nice to see a smart and entertaining person get recognized.
Here's hoping she can do some good.
(H/t CJR)
Contempt?
(Via Firedoglake)
While its hopelessly unlikely that a contempt order would get enforced, it is nice to see that some reaction to the obvious problem of "You were ordered to preserve and maintain all evidence and information regarding the torture, mistreatment and abuse of detainees - and you destroyed videotapes of detainee interrogations."
The obvious wiggle room is that the order might be construed as pertaining only to detainees at Guantanamo, and the taped interrogations took place in Thailand. But the detainees had been moved to Gitmo - and this was not the only judicial order.
At least, we'll get some squirming - but I like to hope for a Fitzgerald-style inquiry.
Late yesterday, a federal judge said he is considering holding the Central Intelligence Agency in contempt for destroying videotapes depicting the interrogation of al Qaeda detainees. Judge Alvin Hellerstein of the U.S. District Court of the Southern District of New York ordered the CIA to identify everything that it had destroyed and also catalogue all summaries, transcripts, information on witnesses and any relevant documents or memoranda within 30 days after an order is entered.Wouldn't that be nice?
While its hopelessly unlikely that a contempt order would get enforced, it is nice to see that some reaction to the obvious problem of "You were ordered to preserve and maintain all evidence and information regarding the torture, mistreatment and abuse of detainees - and you destroyed videotapes of detainee interrogations."
The obvious wiggle room is that the order might be construed as pertaining only to detainees at Guantanamo, and the taped interrogations took place in Thailand. But the detainees had been moved to Gitmo - and this was not the only judicial order.
At least, we'll get some squirming - but I like to hope for a Fitzgerald-style inquiry.
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
I would like to take this moment to denounce NBC Olympic soccer coverage
Click for full size screed
(H/t to the BoC)
Also...
...the Men's semifinals are done:
Scoreline - August 19, 2008
Nigeria: 4
Adefemi 17'; Ogbuke Obasi 59', 72'; Okonkwo 78'
Belgium: 1
Ciman 88'
Belgium, Belgium, Belgium.... I wanted to believe in you - but the Nigerians were just unstoppable. They could have scored ten if the gods were with them. I hope they are in similar form in the final - because they'll be up against the forces of raw evil:
No, not Guatamala, that's tomorrow! The other forces of raw evil....Scoreline - August 19, 2008
Argentina: 3
Aguero 52', 58'; Riquelme 76' PK
Brasil: 0
The Argies beat f$#@ out of Brasil and then some. Sure, the ref was helping (disallowing a goal and ejecting two Brazillians - the second red was total crap), but Brasil was just not getting it done. Lots of energy and no payoff.
So it's Nigeria vs. Argentina - I'm hoping the terrifying speed of Nigeria will rule the day - but the Argies have always been thuggish defenders.
Here's hoping I get to see Maradonna cry again. No wait - here's hoping they never televise his ugly mug again.
'sides - I want to see this guy go on a tear:
Chinedu Ogbuke Obasi: simply on fire.
Monday, August 18, 2008
I demand a rematch!!
Cristiane does...what is that? the hula? Stick to soccer, girlfriend.
Forget that Brasil's samba queens had their way with defending world champions Germany.
Scoreline - August 18, 2008
Brasil: 4
Formiga 43'; Cristiane 49', 76'; Marta 53'
Germany: 1
Prinz 10'
Forget that no one had even scored a tournament goal against Germany in four years.
Forget even that the US rose to the occasion against a surprisingly talented Japan
Scoreline - August 18, 2008
Japan: 2
Ohno 17'; Arakawa 93'
USA: 4
Hucles 41', 81'; Chalupny 44'; O'Reilly 71'
The US is playing Brasil in the Gold medal match. The rest is trivia.
Oh, it's so ON!!!
(Cristiane, you think I forgot that fist pump after Boxx's red card? Oh, I think not!)
According to Pew - I'm well informed...
(Via Editor & Publisher)
The results of the new Pew Survey on News Consumption (taken every two years and released this afternoon) suggest that viewers of the “fake news” programs "The Daily Show"and "The Colbert Report" are more knowledgeable about current events (as judged by three test questions) than watchers of “real” cable news shows hosted by Lou Dobbs, Bill O’Reilly and Larry King, among others -- as well as average consumers of NBC, ABC, Fox News, CNN, C-SPAN and daily newspapers.
Contingency plan
Remember that contingency plan for the Treasury Dept to help out Freddie Mac/Fannie Mae?
Looks like might be able to refer to it without using the word 'contingency.'
(Via Bloomberg)
It's hardly a sure thing - and 'Treasury intervention' could take many forms - but the rumblings are out there.
Get yer loans while you can, folks.
Looks like might be able to refer to it without using the word 'contingency.'
(Via Bloomberg)
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac tumbled in New York trading to their lowest levels in more than 17 years on concern the government will be forced to bail out the mortgage- finance companies, wiping out common stockholders.
Fannie slid 22 percent, while Freddie dropped 25 percent after Barron's reported that the Bush administration is anticipating the government-chartered companies will fail to raise the equity they need to offset credit losses, prompting the U.S. Treasury to act. The companies' stock market values are well below the minimum of $10 billion in capital that each would need to raise to ``have any credibility,'' Barron's said in its story.
``We agree with the call for Treasury intervention and think it is very, very likely to happen before the end of the third quarter,'' Ajay Rajadhyaksha, the head of fixed income strategy for Barclays Capital Inc., said in a telephone interview today. ``Without government help, we think there is very little chance of Freddie completing a significant capital raising.''
It's hardly a sure thing - and 'Treasury intervention' could take many forms - but the rumblings are out there.
Get yer loans while you can, folks.
Court: It's not religious freedom - it's bigotry
Unanimous California Supreme Court ruling:
(Via ABC News)
(Via ABC News)
Doctors Can't Deny Lesbians Care on Religious Grounds
Justice Joyce Kennard ruled that two Christian fertility doctors who refused to artificially inseminate a lesbian couple cannot claim a free speech or religious exemption from California's anti-discrimination law.
The ruling extends a state law barring sexual orientation-based discrimination to the medical profession.
Send in the clowns
Men's Olympic soccer.
+
Italy vs. Belgium.
=
Freakshow.
This match had everything. Two straight red cards (including a Zidane) two PKs, lead changes, shorthanded drama, and a brilliant solo goal for the win.
The kind of game you need a cigarette after. Ahhhh.
---
Start off with the first goal:
Italy's Robert Aquafresca (twice voted Europe's most drinkable footballer) is absolutely manhandled by Thomas Vermaelen in the box.
This being Italy, I'm naturally looking for the playacting – and it doesn't help that the Italians are exchanging celebratory kisses after it happens - but Vermaelen is dead to rights.
Apparently the Belgian defender believed he was invisible when he hugged Aquafresca and pulled him down in front of the ref.
You can't see me! Oh, wait – you can.
Red Card. Arrivederci!
Rossi + Spot kick = Goal.
Italy up by a goal, Belgium playing with ten men. The makings of a long night for Belgium. Defend, defend and hope for a goal, right?
Only the Belgians don't see it that way.
They keep going forward – and defending to boot. They're everywhere. They're getting serious time in the Italian side of the field.
And they get a cross. Dembele heads it towards goal. Cigarini barely clears it off the line and –
Goal.
What? The ref rules that the ball crossed the line before Cigarini cleared it. Belgium's tied it. I'm looking at the replay and I'm thinking that was a very favorable call for the Belgians. It might have made the line, but over it? I don't think so.
Regardless – it revitalizes the game. We won't have another dreary Italian defend-a-thon. They gotta go earn it.
The Belgians aren't turtling in either – runs forward, long balls. They're still pressing right up to the half.
Injury time, a long ball lands for Kevin Mirallas, who turns and hooks one past Italy's Viviano. Belgium's leading and the half ends.
At this point, it's been a solid game. Great individual play by the Belgians. Italy – well… they weren't terrible.
In the second half Italy seems to have realized that scoring again would help their chances. They pour it on, but just can't get it done. Goal called back for offsides and a wrongheaded call on Rossi that should have gone the other way.
Maybe the ref was just sick of seeing Italian players sprawl on the field, maybe he figured, I gave you one penalty! What do you want from me?
Whatever the reason, Rossi gets booked – and the game goes on.
Belgium still looked dangerous, but Italy struck next – or rather – Italy got another penalty.
Rossi + Spot kick = Goal.
Honestly, the second PK for Italy was legitimate, but I don't think I'm alone in being disappointed in a team as talented as Italy getting half their Olympic goals from PKs.
Yes, teams they outclass will foul them more often – but I tend to think the Italians have gotten a little too good at playing the ref instead of just playing the game.
In any event - they earned it, they scored it – and we're tied at two.
If this were any other game, one of two things would happen: Belgium would turtle in and play for penalties – or they'd start leaving gaps and the Italians would eviscerate them.
But this was a freakshow.
Dembele (he of the dodgy first goal) gets the ball at midfield and races past two defenders. He cuts past a third and does a lovely give and go before closing on the box and shooting through his marker's legs.
Viviano has it – should have it – misses it.
Goal. An absolute world class effort from Dembele and the Belgians are going ape.
I'm watching two Belgian fans in particular as they stop in mid celebration and point.
I'm like, They just scored....What would stop them in mid scream…?
The camera goes back to the field and you see the Italian keeper taking his gloves off and pointing to his eye.
The ref is putting away a red card.
What the…?
The replay shows Belgian striker Mirallas with the ball jog past Viviano and toss it over his left shoulder – right into Viviano's head.
Accident? Yeah, right.
Mirallas is razzing the keeper pure and simple. The kind of play that can be defended as "what? I didn't know he was there?" but is absolutely designed to piss off and provoke.
It does.
Viviano (who is an idiot) runs over to Mirallas, grabs him and shoves him. Mirallas (who is not an idiot) goes down. As is almost always the case, the ref has missed the provocation and arrives in time to punish the retaliation. Deliberately mugging a player out of play is a straight red.
Viviano's gone.
But years of Italian coaching die hard – and he repeatedly points to his eye as if to say: Don't you understand? He hand-tossed a soccer ball at me from 3 meters! I'm lucky my head's still attached!!
Pathetic. Yes, he was provoked. Yes, Mirallas was trying to piss him off, but when it comes to provocation - the Italians have nothing to say.
Level on manpower and down on goals – the Italians flailed around for the remaining fifteen minutes. Feeling like the injured party, they kept appealing to the ref – it was pathetic.
In what was literally the last two minutes of the game, an Italian defender in a typical corner scrum comes up pointing to his arm and appealing for a card.
You could tell the ref had just had it with this kind of crap. Let me get this straight: You're in your own end, with a goal kick and I'm supposed to card a guy for bumping into your arm? He waved him away and stalked off.
Italy out. Belgium in. All's right with global karma.
Honestly. Italy can kick the world's ass if they forget about flopping and just play the damn game.
Go Belgium. Dembele? He's gonna sign a niiiice deal sometime soon.
Scoreline – August 16, 2008
Italy: 2
Rossi 18', 74'
Belgium: 3
Dembele 23' 79'; Mirallas 47'
+
Italy vs. Belgium.
=
Freakshow.
This match had everything. Two straight red cards (including a Zidane) two PKs, lead changes, shorthanded drama, and a brilliant solo goal for the win.
The kind of game you need a cigarette after. Ahhhh.
---
Start off with the first goal:
Italy's Robert Aquafresca (twice voted Europe's most drinkable footballer) is absolutely manhandled by Thomas Vermaelen in the box.
This being Italy, I'm naturally looking for the playacting – and it doesn't help that the Italians are exchanging celebratory kisses after it happens - but Vermaelen is dead to rights.
Apparently the Belgian defender believed he was invisible when he hugged Aquafresca and pulled him down in front of the ref.
You can't see me! Oh, wait – you can.
Red Card. Arrivederci!
Rossi + Spot kick = Goal.
Italy up by a goal, Belgium playing with ten men. The makings of a long night for Belgium. Defend, defend and hope for a goal, right?
Only the Belgians don't see it that way.
They keep going forward – and defending to boot. They're everywhere. They're getting serious time in the Italian side of the field.
And they get a cross. Dembele heads it towards goal. Cigarini barely clears it off the line and –
Goal.
What? The ref rules that the ball crossed the line before Cigarini cleared it. Belgium's tied it. I'm looking at the replay and I'm thinking that was a very favorable call for the Belgians. It might have made the line, but over it? I don't think so.
Regardless – it revitalizes the game. We won't have another dreary Italian defend-a-thon. They gotta go earn it.
The Belgians aren't turtling in either – runs forward, long balls. They're still pressing right up to the half.
Injury time, a long ball lands for Kevin Mirallas, who turns and hooks one past Italy's Viviano. Belgium's leading and the half ends.
At this point, it's been a solid game. Great individual play by the Belgians. Italy – well… they weren't terrible.
In the second half Italy seems to have realized that scoring again would help their chances. They pour it on, but just can't get it done. Goal called back for offsides and a wrongheaded call on Rossi that should have gone the other way.
Maybe the ref was just sick of seeing Italian players sprawl on the field, maybe he figured, I gave you one penalty! What do you want from me?
Whatever the reason, Rossi gets booked – and the game goes on.
Belgium still looked dangerous, but Italy struck next – or rather – Italy got another penalty.
Rossi + Spot kick = Goal.
Honestly, the second PK for Italy was legitimate, but I don't think I'm alone in being disappointed in a team as talented as Italy getting half their Olympic goals from PKs.
Yes, teams they outclass will foul them more often – but I tend to think the Italians have gotten a little too good at playing the ref instead of just playing the game.
In any event - they earned it, they scored it – and we're tied at two.
If this were any other game, one of two things would happen: Belgium would turtle in and play for penalties – or they'd start leaving gaps and the Italians would eviscerate them.
But this was a freakshow.
Dembele (he of the dodgy first goal) gets the ball at midfield and races past two defenders. He cuts past a third and does a lovely give and go before closing on the box and shooting through his marker's legs.
Viviano has it – should have it – misses it.
Goal. An absolute world class effort from Dembele and the Belgians are going ape.
I'm watching two Belgian fans in particular as they stop in mid celebration and point.
I'm like, They just scored....What would stop them in mid scream…?
The camera goes back to the field and you see the Italian keeper taking his gloves off and pointing to his eye.
The ref is putting away a red card.
What the…?
The replay shows Belgian striker Mirallas with the ball jog past Viviano and toss it over his left shoulder – right into Viviano's head.
Accident? Yeah, right.
Mirallas is razzing the keeper pure and simple. The kind of play that can be defended as "what? I didn't know he was there?" but is absolutely designed to piss off and provoke.
It does.
Viviano (who is an idiot) runs over to Mirallas, grabs him and shoves him. Mirallas (who is not an idiot) goes down. As is almost always the case, the ref has missed the provocation and arrives in time to punish the retaliation. Deliberately mugging a player out of play is a straight red.
Viviano's gone.
But years of Italian coaching die hard – and he repeatedly points to his eye as if to say: Don't you understand? He hand-tossed a soccer ball at me from 3 meters! I'm lucky my head's still attached!!
Pathetic. Yes, he was provoked. Yes, Mirallas was trying to piss him off, but when it comes to provocation - the Italians have nothing to say.
Level on manpower and down on goals – the Italians flailed around for the remaining fifteen minutes. Feeling like the injured party, they kept appealing to the ref – it was pathetic.
In what was literally the last two minutes of the game, an Italian defender in a typical corner scrum comes up pointing to his arm and appealing for a card.
You could tell the ref had just had it with this kind of crap. Let me get this straight: You're in your own end, with a goal kick and I'm supposed to card a guy for bumping into your arm? He waved him away and stalked off.
Italy out. Belgium in. All's right with global karma.
Honestly. Italy can kick the world's ass if they forget about flopping and just play the damn game.
Go Belgium. Dembele? He's gonna sign a niiiice deal sometime soon.
Fear us, for we are Belgian!!
Scoreline – August 16, 2008
Italy: 2
Rossi 18', 74'
Belgium: 3
Dembele 23' 79'; Mirallas 47'
Sunday, August 17, 2008
Thank God for the cutting room floor
But I was going into Tosche Station to pick up some power converters!It's becoming clear to me that George Lucas was not so much a visionary as he was a stopped clock that the world kept looking towards at just the right time.
-Luke Skywalker, (in arguably the worst written and worst performed line in the original franchise).
For as much as I (still) love the Star Wars saga, it seems to me that Lucas' tendency towards flat dialog and superfluous scenes existed in 1977. The difference was, back then editors were willing to stand up to him.
Look at this set of scenes and try to imagine how they would have added to the story:
Thanks to editing we were spared Tosche station, Biggs and his dumb friends, and Luke's incredibly-stupid looking hat.
Every movie has scenes that got chopped – but you can see how good editing leaves a bit of mystery to the backstory. Having Lucas parade every nuance past you (as he does in this sequence) just shows you how unwilling he is to leave anything up to his audience.
You must see it his way. In a nutshell, that's what's wrong with the new movies –
I will hit you with a hammer. See the hammer? I am now picking it up. I am moving toward towards you. My hammer is raising up now – in my hands. See how it is pointed towards your head? The hammer is moving now – downward…
Sigh.
As pathetic as it is to admit, I've written some screenplay/teleplays and while I can understand the motivation to write a scene that goes nowhere – (you typically don't realize how pointless a scene is until you finish it) you should be able to weed it out before shooting.
Thankfully, for most of the first three movies somebody was cutting the crap before they released the movie
By the time the next three movies came around – nobody could tell George anything.
Damn shame, too.
----
Also, a propo of absolutely nothing:
If like me, you had vague recollections of a Star Wars TV special – it wasn't a bad hallucination – it was just an incredibly bad idea that actually happened.
Wookies in robes and Princess Leia singing like a 70's diva. Dear God – how I wish I'd forgotten completely….
Saturday, August 16, 2008
Apples to apples
CJR's Trudy Lieberman takes on the health care proposals of both presidential candidates and (amazingly) offers a straight up comparison of how the plans would affect real people.
Informing the public about the positions of presidential candidates - What a concept!
In Part I of her coverage she points out how ill informed the public is on this issue.
In Part II she details a father and son's medical needs and shows how they would fare under each plan- great stuff. As you'd suspect, there are no easy answers on this one - but being informed is so refreshing.
Yea!
Informing the public about the positions of presidential candidates - What a concept!
In Part I of her coverage she points out how ill informed the public is on this issue.
In Part II she details a father and son's medical needs and shows how they would fare under each plan- great stuff. As you'd suspect, there are no easy answers on this one - but being informed is so refreshing.
Yea!
Friday, August 15, 2008
Bolts of lightning
By virtue of two lob-sided matches, the US womens team has their Olympic quarterfinal against Canada. This is a good thing, because the team desperately needed to dominate someone. Canada's a physical team, but they've always been second bannana.
Their victories have typically come by virtue of individual brilliance and great timing. We run the game, and it ours to lose.
Case in point is their main offensive weapon Christine Sinclair. She's like a 30 foot crocodile sitting on the opposite bank of the river.
You know its there - and you're watching. Minutes, hours - its lookin' at you - you're lookin' at it.
You're ready for it, and it knows you're ready.
After most of the day, it turns around and goes to sleep.
You congratulate yourself and reach for your drink-
--AND IT EATS YOU!!!
That's Sinclair. Does nothing for half the game and suddenly - BAM! - you're wondering what hit you.
At tip off, the US is looking great, the weather is looking like a monsoon. Despite the downpour, Rampone and company have total control of the pace. Just like the US of old. We're attacking, Canada's defending.
If the ball is going into empty space, there's a US player off camera just waiting to scoop it up. There's some sparkling combination play. Lay offs, overlaps-
Good times.
Twelve minutes in, there's a cross from Amy Rodriguez that's headed back across the Canadian goal. The ball goes to Angela Hucles, who taps it in.
The US players exult - and Canada's keeper is down with a knee injury.
Canada has to sub in a keeper, because McLeod's really hurt - so that's one less strategy sub for them.
It's looking bad for Canucks.
And then the weather really gets bad. Bad to the point where lightning strikes so close the new keeper jumps.
And then they delay the game - it's just too horrible to keep playing. I'd agree - and I've seen soccer games played above the arctic circle in near whiteout. It was a bad, bad storm.
-an hour and a half later - the game starts back up and it's clear that Canada has regrouped. The US still has control, but the Canadians no longer look panicked. They're on the defensive, but they're being cautious and looking for their moment.
Our defense slobs on a throw in the 30th minute. Canada makes a flailing shot that is deflected easily, but it rolls across the goal mouth some 25 yards out.
-And guess who's there (Looking positively crocodilian?
Sinclair.
Dead run.
Goal.
And now Canada's gets all uppity. We're starting to doubt - there's some really poor defending on our part. All the good mojo is undone.
Hucles is gifted four perfect opportunities (including an open net) and misses them all. Rodriguez scraps for every ball - and kicks them to no one. Its like they forgot who they were.
I'm practically yelling at the screen:
You are the US Women's national team, dammit! Kick some ass
Canada's not even a real country!
Something good starts to happen. The team settles down - gets their control back - and starts to shell the Canadian net. This being soccer, nothing goes in. Brilliant combinations go nowhere. Amy winds her way through defenders only to give and not go. Lloyd can't seem to build up the nerve to be useful.
This is how good teams lose. They get frustrated and start altering the plan.
Sinclair gets some nerve wracking posession in the 67th minute but can't pull the trigger. Twelve minutes later, she gets another chance and bounces one off Hope Solo.
Solo gets the rebound and we're still in it.
Swarming, attacking it's just not happening for the US. Extra time brings more opportunities, but no success until-
Eleven minutes in. When - of all people - Natasha Kai gets a dead on cross from (who else?) Shannon Boxx and dives onto it for the go ahead goal.
Canada just can't recover - and it's all sweetness and light from then on.
Scoreline - August 15, 2008
USA: 2
Hucles 12'; Kai 101'
Canada: 1
Sinclair 30'
Glorious - but if I may be so ungracious: Ms. Kai - it's about goddamned time. You've been nowhere for ages, I'm glad to see you remembered your role.
Abby's out - you have to be the psycho, now. Screaming at people when they look down. Going at the goal like it killed your family. We need a striker who is not afraid.
*ahem*
Okay I'm good, now.
Brasil wins - Norge go home!
and of course Germany beat Sweden. Bummer.
But there's one other thing I have to say:
What the F#$*! got into Japan?
Scoreline - August 15, 2008
China: 0
Japan: 2
Sawa 15'; Nagasato 80'
I mean... Japan has scored seven goals in their last two games. China (of Sun Wen and Zhaou Li Hong fame) is out - in front of the home crowd!
Let's hear it for the minnows!
Their victories have typically come by virtue of individual brilliance and great timing. We run the game, and it ours to lose.
Case in point is their main offensive weapon Christine Sinclair. She's like a 30 foot crocodile sitting on the opposite bank of the river.
You know its there - and you're watching. Minutes, hours - its lookin' at you - you're lookin' at it.
You're ready for it, and it knows you're ready.
After most of the day, it turns around and goes to sleep.
You congratulate yourself and reach for your drink-
--AND IT EATS YOU!!!
That's Sinclair. Does nothing for half the game and suddenly - BAM! - you're wondering what hit you.
At tip off, the US is looking great, the weather is looking like a monsoon. Despite the downpour, Rampone and company have total control of the pace. Just like the US of old. We're attacking, Canada's defending.
If the ball is going into empty space, there's a US player off camera just waiting to scoop it up. There's some sparkling combination play. Lay offs, overlaps-
Good times.
Twelve minutes in, there's a cross from Amy Rodriguez that's headed back across the Canadian goal. The ball goes to Angela Hucles, who taps it in.
The US players exult - and Canada's keeper is down with a knee injury.
Canada has to sub in a keeper, because McLeod's really hurt - so that's one less strategy sub for them.
It's looking bad for Canucks.
And then the weather really gets bad. Bad to the point where lightning strikes so close the new keeper jumps.
And then they delay the game - it's just too horrible to keep playing. I'd agree - and I've seen soccer games played above the arctic circle in near whiteout. It was a bad, bad storm.
-an hour and a half later - the game starts back up and it's clear that Canada has regrouped. The US still has control, but the Canadians no longer look panicked. They're on the defensive, but they're being cautious and looking for their moment.
Our defense slobs on a throw in the 30th minute. Canada makes a flailing shot that is deflected easily, but it rolls across the goal mouth some 25 yards out.
-And guess who's there (Looking positively crocodilian?
Sinclair.
Dead run.
Goal.
And now Canada's gets all uppity. We're starting to doubt - there's some really poor defending on our part. All the good mojo is undone.
Hucles is gifted four perfect opportunities (including an open net) and misses them all. Rodriguez scraps for every ball - and kicks them to no one. Its like they forgot who they were.
I'm practically yelling at the screen:
You are the US Women's national team, dammit! Kick some ass
Canada's not even a real country!
Something good starts to happen. The team settles down - gets their control back - and starts to shell the Canadian net. This being soccer, nothing goes in. Brilliant combinations go nowhere. Amy winds her way through defenders only to give and not go. Lloyd can't seem to build up the nerve to be useful.
This is how good teams lose. They get frustrated and start altering the plan.
Sinclair gets some nerve wracking posession in the 67th minute but can't pull the trigger. Twelve minutes later, she gets another chance and bounces one off Hope Solo.
Solo gets the rebound and we're still in it.
Swarming, attacking it's just not happening for the US. Extra time brings more opportunities, but no success until-
Eleven minutes in. When - of all people - Natasha Kai gets a dead on cross from (who else?) Shannon Boxx and dives onto it for the go ahead goal.
Canada just can't recover - and it's all sweetness and light from then on.
Scoreline - August 15, 2008
USA: 2
Hucles 12'; Kai 101'
Canada: 1
Sinclair 30'
A confident US national team - it's a beautiful thing.
Glorious - but if I may be so ungracious: Ms. Kai - it's about goddamned time. You've been nowhere for ages, I'm glad to see you remembered your role.
Abby's out - you have to be the psycho, now. Screaming at people when they look down. Going at the goal like it killed your family. We need a striker who is not afraid.
*ahem*
Okay I'm good, now.
Brasil wins - Norge go home!
and of course Germany beat Sweden. Bummer.
But there's one other thing I have to say:
What the F#$*! got into Japan?
Nippon! Nippon! Nippon!
Scoreline - August 15, 2008
China: 0
Japan: 2
Sawa 15'; Nagasato 80'
I mean... Japan has scored seven goals in their last two games. China (of Sun Wen and Zhaou Li Hong fame) is out - in front of the home crowd!
Let's hear it for the minnows!
No cure for cancer
A few years back - CNN went national with the story of a father of conjoined twins.
He'd asked doctors to surgically separate the children - the operation was extravagantly expensive and unlikely to prolong the lives of the two children (who had a host of other medical problems).
The thrust of the coverage was - should society have to pay for this operation, when the odds are against it resulting in any benefit to the children?
The operation went forward, the money was spent, and the children died.
A good amount of abuse was leveled at the father of these twins. How dare he ask us to finance a no-hope procedure?
Classic CNN: Simplified, emotional, and tacky as all hell.
The Isthmus has what I think is a responsible treatment of this same issue. There are really tough choices that don't make it into the public discussion.
Jacqueline Sutton relates the story of a patient using a drug called Avastin:
Then there was this observation:
For most people, cancer is not an abstraction. How do you say no when people are suffering? or dying?
But while there is only so much money, the supply of worthy patients is bottomless. This country is far too good at equating price with quality - resulting in the reflexive carpet-bombing of our problems with cash.
If we're going to help the most people, we have to get the most value for what we spend - and that will mean less cancer drugs on the market - and telling the fathers of conjoined twins "we are not going to operate."
It's a horrible thought. But it must happen.
He'd asked doctors to surgically separate the children - the operation was extravagantly expensive and unlikely to prolong the lives of the two children (who had a host of other medical problems).
The thrust of the coverage was - should society have to pay for this operation, when the odds are against it resulting in any benefit to the children?
The operation went forward, the money was spent, and the children died.
A good amount of abuse was leveled at the father of these twins. How dare he ask us to finance a no-hope procedure?
Classic CNN: Simplified, emotional, and tacky as all hell.
The Isthmus has what I think is a responsible treatment of this same issue. There are really tough choices that don't make it into the public discussion.
Jacqueline Sutton relates the story of a patient using a drug called Avastin:
Avastin is part of a newer and more expensive generation of cancer medications called biologics, or targeted therapies. Unlike chemotherapy, which attacks cancer in a scorched-earth fashion, targeted therapies hone in on a specific aspect of the cancer disease process, and interrupts it in any number of ways.The article does a nice job of spelling out the brutal choice that is being made here. Do people get access to this drug? Is it worth it?
But Avastin's exciting potential comes with a high sticker price. For an average-size person, a regimen that includes Avastin and chemotherapy can cost $11,000 a month just for the Avastin. That compares to about $300 a month for paclitaxel (the generic form of Taxol) and about $1,500 for Taxotere.
[snip]
The cost might be easier to justify if there were not also concerns about Avastin's long-term effectiveness. A clinical trial involving 700 women found that Avastin extended a tumor's time to progression by about six months for half the patients who received it as part of a combined regimen.
But in most cases the tumor will eventually progress. That is partly why an advisory panel, on a 5-4 vote, recommended against approval. But the Food and Drug Administration decided against this advice.
Then there was this observation:
For James Stewart, a medical oncologist formerly with UW Health, cancer has a "favored-nation status in the medical community" due to the dreaded nature of the disease. "Any cancer drug that shows even minor improvements becomes the new standard, regardless of cost." He is convinced this has not only driven up the cost of treating cancer, but contributed significantly to the rising cost of medical care in general.Nobody wants to think care will be denied on the basis of money - but spending money for the greater good will require some judgment calls, and they will not be fun.
For most people, cancer is not an abstraction. How do you say no when people are suffering? or dying?
But while there is only so much money, the supply of worthy patients is bottomless. This country is far too good at equating price with quality - resulting in the reflexive carpet-bombing of our problems with cash.
If we're going to help the most people, we have to get the most value for what we spend - and that will mean less cancer drugs on the market - and telling the fathers of conjoined twins "we are not going to operate."
It's a horrible thought. But it must happen.
Circling the wagons
(via the NYT)
A rather eye opening account of what damage control looks like in the big leagues:
Surely he had ample reason (his wife and family perhaps) to deny he was the father. What brought him around? Was there a paternity test? Have there been any comments by Mr. Young's spouse on the situation?
Just because the story's been told - what assurances do we have that this isn't another smoke screen?
Oh and Edwards? You're a dork.
If you're going to fool around - you should have switched parties first.
Then your colleagues would rush to your defense - and your political career could continue without pausing.
Now, you'll have to wait until the voters forget (that might take a year!)
A rather eye opening account of what damage control looks like in the big leagues:
As tabloid reports of a sex scandal threatened former Senator John Edwards’s presidential campaign last December on the eve of the Iowa caucuses, two lawyers surfaced with written statements that appeared to exonerate the candidate.Here's a loose end I sincerely hope is being followed up on: This Mr. Young, who has gamely jumped in to assert his parentage over this child - how is it that he know it's his kid?
One of them, Robert J. Gordon of New York, said that his client, Rielle Hunter, a pregnant 43-year-old filmmaker, was not carrying Mr. Edwards’s child. Shortly thereafter, the other lawyer, Pamela J. Marple of Washington, sent word that her client, Andrew Young, an Edwards campaign aide, was the baby’s father.
Seemingly issued independently of Mr. Edwards, the statements appeared to deflate the anonymously sourced reports of an Edwards tryst. But what went unnoticed was that the two lawyers shared an important connection to Mr. Edwards that suggests they were part of an orchestrated effort to protect him, one that is continuing even after he admitted last week that he had an affair with Ms. Hunter but denied that he fathered her child.
The lawyers are linked through Fred Baron, a wealthy Dallas lawyer and former finance chairman for the Edwards campaign who was a key player in the campaign’s response to the scandal. Mr. Gordon has worked with Mr. Baron on class-action personal injury cases, and Ms. Marple helped defend a lawsuit brought against both men and their law firms by an asbestos manufacturer.
After initially saying that he did not know how the lawyers were chosen to represent Ms. Hunter and Mr. Young, Mr. Baron acknowledged that he might have played a role.
Surely he had ample reason (his wife and family perhaps) to deny he was the father. What brought him around? Was there a paternity test? Have there been any comments by Mr. Young's spouse on the situation?
Just because the story's been told - what assurances do we have that this isn't another smoke screen?
Oh and Edwards? You're a dork.
If you're going to fool around - you should have switched parties first.
Then your colleagues would rush to your defense - and your political career could continue without pausing.
Now, you'll have to wait until the voters forget (that might take a year!)
Wrestling with a pig
I'm having trouble believing that this David Zucker movie is anything other than a publicity stunt.
It's sure to get bloggers riled up - and there will be a good deal of media coverage when it comes out.
But really, does anyone think this picture is going to pull in the masses? Does anyone else see this as just a longer version of the 1/2 hour comedy hour?
(H/t to Sadly, No!)
It's sure to get bloggers riled up - and there will be a good deal of media coverage when it comes out.
But really, does anyone think this picture is going to pull in the masses? Does anyone else see this as just a longer version of the 1/2 hour comedy hour?
(H/t to Sadly, No!)
Thursday, August 14, 2008
It was fun while it lasted
After a timid win against Japan and a crushing last second (literaly) draw vs. the Netherlands, the US men only needed a draw to move on.
And they couldn't even manage that.
Scoreline - August 13, 2008
Nigeria: 2
Isaac 39'; Obinna 79'
US: 1
Kljestan 88' PK
Once again, the US was victimized by a Red Card ejection. This time it was defender Michael Orozco - and (amazingly) it was completely justified.
Orozco apparently felt that the best time to throw an elbow is right in front of the referee.
FOUR minutes into the game.
So, the US spends the following hour and a half playing a man down.
Way to go Orozco, you can now hang with Becks and Zidane - oh wait - they were ejected in BIG games. Maybe you can hang with Rigobert Song (it was quick).
Losing a man woke the US up. They played hard - and attacked well. They just couldn't attack and recover well with ten men.
Nigeria has some brilliant attackers (Obinna's goal was something else) and you give them space - they will hurt you.
Down a goal and a man - you've got no real hope.
We nabbed a penalty at the end - Nigeria was reverting to fouls - we even had a crushingly good attempt hit the crosspost - but come the final whistle, we were done.
As ever, it's up to the women's team to bring home the medals.
And they couldn't even manage that.
Maurice Edu reacts to the final whistle.
Scoreline - August 13, 2008
Nigeria: 2
Isaac 39'; Obinna 79'
US: 1
Kljestan 88' PK
Once again, the US was victimized by a Red Card ejection. This time it was defender Michael Orozco - and (amazingly) it was completely justified.
Orozco apparently felt that the best time to throw an elbow is right in front of the referee.
FOUR minutes into the game.
So, the US spends the following hour and a half playing a man down.
Way to go Orozco, you can now hang with Becks and Zidane - oh wait - they were ejected in BIG games. Maybe you can hang with Rigobert Song (it was quick).
Losing a man woke the US up. They played hard - and attacked well. They just couldn't attack and recover well with ten men.
Nigeria has some brilliant attackers (Obinna's goal was something else) and you give them space - they will hurt you.
Down a goal and a man - you've got no real hope.
We nabbed a penalty at the end - Nigeria was reverting to fouls - we even had a crushingly good attempt hit the crosspost - but come the final whistle, we were done.
As ever, it's up to the women's team to bring home the medals.
And I thought Atty. Gen. Gonzales was a fool...
(H/t to E and the 13th floor)
Here's our esteemed Atty. General Michael Mukasey telling us that there will be no prosecutions of those who politicized DoJ hiring procedures:
How far the DoJ has fallen.
Here's our esteemed Atty. General Michael Mukasey telling us that there will be no prosecutions of those who politicized DoJ hiring procedures:
Where there is enough evidence to charge someone with a crime, we vigorously prosecute. But not every wrong, or even every violation of the law, is a crime.Allow me to translate:
I will do my job - as I understand it - to the best of my ability. And I've been informed that my job is to do as little as possible.Remember when this guy was seen as a breath of fresh air?
How far the DoJ has fallen.
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
Reality filter
(via DangerRoom)
Recalling the many instances where our government issued "statements" have fallen short of reality - it's worth remembering that there is a difference between mere spin and propaganda.
Sharon Weinberger takes that thought and runs with it:
Read on.
Recalling the many instances where our government issued "statements" have fallen short of reality - it's worth remembering that there is a difference between mere spin and propaganda.
Sharon Weinberger takes that thought and runs with it:
I see an increasing number of government offices renaming public affairs positions as “strategic media” or "strategic communication" officers. Why is this bad? Because when a newspaper calls up a public affairs officer to find out the number of casualties in an IED attack, the answer should be a number (preferably accurate), not a carefully crafted statement about how well the war is going. The role of public affairs is to convey information, not messages, and anyone who forgets that fundamental role should reread the Pentagon’s “Principles of Information,” which dictates that the public affairs is “to expedite the flow of information to the public; propaganda has no place in DoD public affairs programs."To say the least.
Read on.
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
Beat you hollow
Three points and down on goals vs Norge, the US women were up against it.
Yes, they were playing a no-hope team like New Zealand - but it would not be out of line for the kiwis to pack the defense and frustrate the US into doing something stupid like a draw.
The Norge was through, so they were resting starters and secretly vibing three points to Japan to put pressure on us.
They are that evil.
A draw by the US would put Japan in a position to take second place away from us. It's not the likely scenario, but neither was the US giving up two goals in the first four minutes of their Olympics.
In my gut - I know Japan is going to get three points off the Norge. It's going to happen, because it would suck for us.
All that needs to happen is for the US to lame out like they did against Japan and this could be a third place slot and a head on with China.
China. Perennial juggernaut of women's soccer playing in front of the home crowd.
Their national coming out party. Working the 08-08-08 ju-ju...
You think they're up for this? Yeah, kinda.
We don't want any of that.
So the kiwis have to die. Historically, the US doesn't edge past the competition - we swallow them whole. If we like them, we spit out the bones so there can be a funeral.
This team has not been following the script. Abby's out, our offensive passing has been sloppy and our defending has been - well, sh!t.
So, when I'm queuing up the game off TiVo - I'm feeling that all too familiar feeling of the US soccer fan:
How will fate f!*k with us this time?
(I won't even go into how the US men's team led the Netherlands 2-1 until TiVo clipped off the game - at three minutes before time - and I had to hit the internet to find out that the Dutch bashed in an equalizer in the last seconds of the game. Soccer gods = Total b@stards)
Kickoff, a weak rush ends up in a goal kick for New Zealand. The ball is kicked, gets trapped by the US and ends up at O'Reilly's feet. She advances towards goal, looks up - and lobs an arcing 30 yard wonder past the keeper.
Goal. 40 seconds into the game.
Happy dance!
Incredibly, the hits just kept coming:
Scoreline - August 12, 2008
USA: 4
O'Reilly 1'; Rodriguez 43'; Tarpley 56'; Hucles 60'
New Zealand: 0
We did not sparkle as a team - our passing was still dreary going into the box. Rodriguez and Box made flailing passes throughout the game, our defenders gave up looks that a better team would have scored on (especially right before the half) but there were individual moments of brilliance.
When you dish out a butt kicking - it does wonders for your self esteem. This team has looked nervous, maybe now they can settle, put their heads down and face down their next opponent.
And who might that be? I'm so glad you asked.
We finish second in the group - we're off to face Brasil. Yes, that Brasil. Norway is going to carry the group unless they really get trounced by Japan - and we all know that's not gonna-
Scoreline - August 12, 2008
Norway: 1
Knutsen 27'
Japan: 5
Kinga 31'; Folstad 51' OG; Ohno 52'; Sawa 70'; Hara 83'
How the F@#k did that happen?
Okay, I'll admit I've mismeasured this Japan team. Against all odds, they seem to have discovered that offense can result in goals. Who knew?
Japan beat holy hell out of the Norge and have managed to win themselves a quarterfinals slot.
It's against China - so its sure to be a sporting match. Good thing there's no bad blood there, or wow could that get ugly...
Anyway - we're top of the group now. Goal differential puts us over and the Norge are sentenced to Brasil. (Oh, and - just FYI: Cristiane scored a hat trick vs. Nigeria including lobbing the keeper with a bicycle kick. Goal of the tournament. Thanks for showing up, ladies.)
The US is now off to play - Canada! I mean, how great is that? Yes, they drew with China - but better them than the samba queens. And the Norge and Brasil get to eat each other.
Happy dance!
Yes, they were playing a no-hope team like New Zealand - but it would not be out of line for the kiwis to pack the defense and frustrate the US into doing something stupid like a draw.
The Norge was through, so they were resting starters and secretly vibing three points to Japan to put pressure on us.
They are that evil.
A draw by the US would put Japan in a position to take second place away from us. It's not the likely scenario, but neither was the US giving up two goals in the first four minutes of their Olympics.
In my gut - I know Japan is going to get three points off the Norge. It's going to happen, because it would suck for us.
All that needs to happen is for the US to lame out like they did against Japan and this could be a third place slot and a head on with China.
China. Perennial juggernaut of women's soccer playing in front of the home crowd.
Their national coming out party. Working the 08-08-08 ju-ju...
You think they're up for this? Yeah, kinda.
We don't want any of that.
So the kiwis have to die. Historically, the US doesn't edge past the competition - we swallow them whole. If we like them, we spit out the bones so there can be a funeral.
This team has not been following the script. Abby's out, our offensive passing has been sloppy and our defending has been - well, sh!t.
So, when I'm queuing up the game off TiVo - I'm feeling that all too familiar feeling of the US soccer fan:
How will fate f!*k with us this time?
(I won't even go into how the US men's team led the Netherlands 2-1 until TiVo clipped off the game - at three minutes before time - and I had to hit the internet to find out that the Dutch bashed in an equalizer in the last seconds of the game. Soccer gods = Total b@stards)
Kickoff, a weak rush ends up in a goal kick for New Zealand. The ball is kicked, gets trapped by the US and ends up at O'Reilly's feet. She advances towards goal, looks up - and lobs an arcing 30 yard wonder past the keeper.
Goal. 40 seconds into the game.
Happy dance!
Incredibly, the hits just kept coming:
Scoreline - August 12, 2008
USA: 4
O'Reilly 1'; Rodriguez 43'; Tarpley 56'; Hucles 60'
New Zealand: 0
World? We're not dead yet.
We did not sparkle as a team - our passing was still dreary going into the box. Rodriguez and Box made flailing passes throughout the game, our defenders gave up looks that a better team would have scored on (especially right before the half) but there were individual moments of brilliance.
When you dish out a butt kicking - it does wonders for your self esteem. This team has looked nervous, maybe now they can settle, put their heads down and face down their next opponent.
And who might that be? I'm so glad you asked.
We finish second in the group - we're off to face Brasil. Yes, that Brasil. Norway is going to carry the group unless they really get trounced by Japan - and we all know that's not gonna-
Nippon! Nippon! Nippon! Nippon! Nippon!
Scoreline - August 12, 2008
Norway: 1
Knutsen 27'
Japan: 5
Kinga 31'; Folstad 51' OG; Ohno 52'; Sawa 70'; Hara 83'
How the F@#k did that happen?
Okay, I'll admit I've mismeasured this Japan team. Against all odds, they seem to have discovered that offense can result in goals. Who knew?
Japan beat holy hell out of the Norge and have managed to win themselves a quarterfinals slot.
It's against China - so its sure to be a sporting match. Good thing there's no bad blood there, or wow could that get ugly...
Anyway - we're top of the group now. Goal differential puts us over and the Norge are sentenced to Brasil. (Oh, and - just FYI: Cristiane scored a hat trick vs. Nigeria including lobbing the keeper with a bicycle kick. Goal of the tournament. Thanks for showing up, ladies.)
The US is now off to play - Canada! I mean, how great is that? Yes, they drew with China - but better them than the samba queens. And the Norge and Brasil get to eat each other.
Happy dance!
Lies of omission
A defining failure of our national media was the thundering silence that greeted the story from the NYT's David Barstow about military analysts being co-opted by the Pentagon.
Again - not news - but an ongoing embarrassment to our national media.
The networks have yet to even cover this story much less address their own complicity in it - so CJR is bringing it up again:
While I've always had my doubts about the quality of our network news, If I had to point to one event that solidified my distrust - it's this story.
Willful duplicity by all the networks.
We won't cover this, because we look stupid.
And that's the best case scenario - more paranoid minds than me can come up with bigger outrages without much effort.
Again - not news - but an ongoing embarrassment to our national media.
The networks have yet to even cover this story much less address their own complicity in it - so CJR is bringing it up again:
[Barstow's article] was built on the back of a laudable two-year, Freedom of Information Act battle. The Times and its counsel dragged out thousands of pages of Pentagon transcripts, e-mails, and memos describing the program, but only after months of delays and circular excuses. As public editor Clark Hoyt wrote in a column describing the struggle, full cooperation came only after the paper persisted and a judge threatened to bring Pentagon officials into his court to explain “why they shouldn’t be held in contempt.”[snip]Yet not one of the nightly commercial newscasts mentioned the story or offered an on-air explanation to its viewers. Reliable Sources, CNN’s Sunday morning media show, hosted a late-breaking panel the morning Barstow’s article appeared. MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann briefly mentioned it. Elsewhere, the silence has been conspicuous.Given the lack of cooperation some of the news operations gave Barstow in reporting his piece, the weak-kneed response is hardly surprising. Fox News, whose analysts made up the biggest chunk of the Pentagon program, tersely refused to participate in the Times story, and failed to return CJR’s calls seeking comment. CBS also turned down Barstow’s request to comment on its vetting procedures, and failed to respond to CJR’s oral and written requests for comment. NBCand MSNBC jointly rebuffed an interview request, providing instead a statement attacking the Times piece and insisting that they had full confidence in their analysts despite any “personal commitments—past and present.”
While I've always had my doubts about the quality of our network news, If I had to point to one event that solidified my distrust - it's this story.
Willful duplicity by all the networks.
We won't cover this, because we look stupid.
And that's the best case scenario - more paranoid minds than me can come up with bigger outrages without much effort.
Be. Not. Afraid.
JB over at Balkinization has some words of comfort for progressives who find themselves staring in disbelief at the GOP-spawned miasma oozing out of their television:
No need to get cocky, or complacent, folks. But despite McCain's insistent faith in the "latest poll," he's the one with something to prove to America - and he just treading water.
So sayeth Emory University Prof. Alan Abromowitz.
The horserace is what we've always known it was: horsesh!t.
...the 10 day rolling average of the Gallup poll is pretty stable, with Obama having a modest 3 to 4 point lead over a fairly long span of time.McCain will continue to thrash like a drowning animal, but all it will net him is the bemused attention of public that has already made up its mind.
Fundamental features of the political situation-- a weak economy, an unpopular war, and the fact that the Republicans have held office for eight years-- suggest that if nothing catastrophic happens, Barack Obama will win the election in November. He may win it in a landslide, but the more likely result is that he will win by a margin of 3 to 4 points-- pretty much where he is now.
No need to get cocky, or complacent, folks. But despite McCain's insistent faith in the "latest poll," he's the one with something to prove to America - and he just treading water.
So sayeth Emory University Prof. Alan Abromowitz.
The horserace is what we've always known it was: horsesh!t.
Monday, August 11, 2008
Four mad minutes
You have to hand it to the Norge - and we did:
Scoreline - August 6, 2008
Norway: 2
Larsen 2'; Wiik 4'
USA: 0
In four minutes, the USA committed two defensive blunders in front of their own net. The red menace has always capitalized on our generosity - and this US squad has yet to show the ability to bounce back from real trouble.
Abby's missing the tournament with a broken leg (thanks to Brasil, of all teams) so the table is set for some serious suckage.
Scoreline - August 9, 2008
USA: 1
Lloyd 27'
Japan: 0
Oh sure we beat Japan - but hell, so can most JV squads.
The Norge got a second win vs the kiwis, so they're clear to the next round.
We're in about as bad a spot as we can be - We need a win and the red menace can screw us by losing against Japan.
Come Tuesday, we better kick some kiwi butt, or this tournament will be a national disgrace.
Scoreline - August 6, 2008
Norway: 2
Larsen 2'; Wiik 4'
USA: 0
In four minutes, the USA committed two defensive blunders in front of their own net. The red menace has always capitalized on our generosity - and this US squad has yet to show the ability to bounce back from real trouble.
Abby's missing the tournament with a broken leg (thanks to Brasil, of all teams) so the table is set for some serious suckage.
Scoreline - August 9, 2008
USA: 1
Lloyd 27'
Japan: 0
Oh sure we beat Japan - but hell, so can most JV squads.
The Norge got a second win vs the kiwis, so they're clear to the next round.
We're in about as bad a spot as we can be - We need a win and the red menace can screw us by losing against Japan.
Come Tuesday, we better kick some kiwi butt, or this tournament will be a national disgrace.
Have handbasket, will travel
Among the quotations from this weekend that I didn't need to hear was this one:
Russia continues to confound, and there is nothing we can do.
You wonder if Putin has planned to cow the rest of the former republics by making an example of Georgia.
Shota Utiashvili, an official in the Georgian Interior Ministry, said the Russians had moved tanks and troops to within a few kilometers of Gori and were “trying to cut the country in half.”
Mr. Utiashvili said that if they tried to occupy Georgia, “there will probably be guerrilla warfare all over the country.”
He said: “We need large supplies of humanitarian aid, because we have thousands of wounded. And weapons. We need weapons.”(via the NYT)
Russia continues to confound, and there is nothing we can do.
You wonder if Putin has planned to cow the rest of the former republics by making an example of Georgia.
Friday, August 08, 2008
Killer signage
(Via Neatorama)
If you had to make a sign telling people which way to go in a parking lot, you could do it a lot of different ways.
Odds are, most designers would opt for something other than this:
Damn shame, too. This is a sign I'd notice.
If you had to make a sign telling people which way to go in a parking lot, you could do it a lot of different ways.
Odds are, most designers would opt for something other than this:
Damn shame, too. This is a sign I'd notice.
Thursday, August 07, 2008
I'm a geek, but...
...at least I'm better than that guy.
I've said this a lot, in defense of my hobbies - I've even plotted my place on the Geek Hierarchy - but I don't know that you get much geekier than a full-on Star Wars wedding.
Compared to them, I'm completely normal (and I've written fan fic).
I think they need to revise the hierarchy. I'd put this one right below the ocelot reference.
(H/t Neatorama and NG and MG for the chart)
I've said this a lot, in defense of my hobbies - I've even plotted my place on the Geek Hierarchy - but I don't know that you get much geekier than a full-on Star Wars wedding.
Compared to them, I'm completely normal (and I've written fan fic).
I think they need to revise the hierarchy. I'd put this one right below the ocelot reference.
(H/t Neatorama and NG and MG for the chart)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)