Whither the Juggernauts?
This has got to be the most asinine sports editorial I've ever read, which is why I'm posting it. Frank Deford of Sports Illustrated is complaining that, now that there's parity in the NFL (i.e. "Any Given Sunday"), there are no dominant teams who can steamroll the entire league for years on end so that the rest of us little peons can grovel at their glorious feet. Is it me? I thought the rest of the country was sick and tired of watching the Yankees win every single year. I know I was sick and tired of watching grown men genuflect to Michael Jordan like he was Emperor Hirohito instead of trying their hardest to dunk on his neck like eternal Macroscope hero, John Starks. The fact of the matter is, I have watched more football this season than I ever have in my entire life, and it's because every single game has the potential to be a heart-stopper. Unfortunately, when everybody has a chance, it does put the professional sports prognosticators out of business, doesn't it? I mean, if there's no dominant team, you, as a sports writer, can't compose reams of paper lauding how superhuman Shaq is. Word of advice - instead of pepetuating the idolatry of celebrities, maybe they should stick to their job description: write about the freakin' games and shut up.

"The apple doesn't fall far from the tree..."
Tomorrow, George W. Bush is going to issue a "friend of the court" brief to the Supreme Court regarding the pending case to review the University of Michigan's affirmative action policy. In tha brief, the President will state that achieving racial diversity is not a compelling reason to justify race-based quotas, i.e. affirmative action is bad.

And for all you naive little Black Republicans out there, who believed this man was your friend (see below), I'd like to quote a line from Kevin Costner in JFK:

"What did you expect from a pig but a grunt."

While the Moderates Were Sleeping...
Your President declared January 19, 2003 to be "National Sanctity of Human Life Day". Of course, next week is also the 30th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, just so everyone is clear what issue we're talking about here.

So, let's have the discussion that apparently everyone in Washington is afraid of: Personally, I'm morally horrified by the idea of abortion. One might argue that, at the other end of the age spectrum, it's the moral equivalent of mercy-killing a sick, old relative who's nursing and care needs have far exceeded the family member's capacity to support them. The difference being that you have to look Uncle Jethro in the eye when you pull the plug on his respirator. Do fetuses even have eyes?

Of course, that's because I'm presuming that life begins at conception. Others don't. And, at this point, I don't think we're ever going to find a happy medium between those two beliefs. But, there's a difference between what I believe and how you govern a country.

IF the government makes abortion illegal because they feel it is morally and ethically wrong, then they must, in turn, provide an adequate support network for unwanted or unintended pregnancies, such as universal prenatal care and eliminating the atrocities that are committed in the foster care system. Otherwise, to insist that this child be born to a mother who won't keep or support it and then release it into the jaws of the failed child care system is tantamount to condemning it to a long, slow, painfully abusive life, with potentially dire consequences for anyone who comes into contact with this person in their later life.

So, since governing a nation ultimately boils down to issues of human calculus, abortion should really be looked at in these terms: the life of one unwanted, uncared-for unborn vs. the lives of countless others who could be irreparably damaged through contact with the emotionally & physically scared person that said unborn has a high probability of growing into.

In the end, until the child support system is fixed, legal abortion is the civically expedient and, ultimately, politically ethical choice to make.

Which is why I'm pro-choice.

And human calculus like what I just described above is why I will NEVER run for public office.

G.W. says "Where are The Plumbers when I need them?!?!?!"
Paul O'Neill gained some serious credibility in my eyes last year when he took a trip to Africa with Bono of U2 and actually seemed to understand the issue of 3rd World debt enough that he might actually do something about it.

Then, of course, President Bush fired him because he didn't believe in trickle-down economics.

Well, O'Neill STILL doesn't believe in trickle-down economics, even though it's going under the alias of "dividend tax elimination". See what he has to say.

The Party of Lincoln
Here's a New York Times article, talking about the little group hug the Republican party leadership held with Black conservatives and Black Republicans to show that the party is really concerned about their issues in light of the whole Trent Lott debacle.

Favorite quote: "When you withstand the things we do as black Republicans, and you still stand firm with the party, that's commitment." from Shannon Reeves, secretary of the California State party and chairman of the Oakland, CA NAACP.

Point of clarification: No, Mr. Reeves, that's not commitment. It's blind devotion, bordering on foolishness. After all, isn't this the same reason why Black Republicans say they rejected the Democratic Party in the first place?

Moreover, if the GOP were really serious about demonstrating their commitment to the Black community, where was their REAL leader, President Bush?

Lastly, let me say this: I'll believe that the GOP is serious about including Black Americans when the President starts doing things like publicly denouncing places like Bob Jones University and other institutions that support discriminatory policies, or publicly renouncing campaign contributions from thinly-veiled white supremacist organizations, or publicly stating that the Confederate States of America was an outlaw organization that brought shame to the American ideals by instigating a war to preserve the state's rights to hold slaves.

Then we can start talking turkey. Or, maybe they should just take a hint from the folks at "Black People Love Us". They seem to have figured it out.

The 3rd Degree
A federal judge just ruled that the government could continue to deny Jose Padilla, the so-called "dirty bomber", access to his lawyers indefinitely because it would jeopardize the interrogation process, as long as the President has declared him an enemy combatant and has provided a "minimal" showing to justify the declaration.

Let me restate this, just so we're all clear on it.

Mr. Padilla is an American citizen who was arrested in Chicago O'Hare Airport. In other words, he's an American taken on American soil. By declaring him an enemy combatant, they're basically saying that O'Hare Airport was a battlefield at the time of his seizure. Since no one even knew that he'd been arrested until John Ashcroft's spectacular announcement from Russia a month later, I seriously doubt that battefield conditions have ever existed at O'Hare. So, this means the government can seize anyone, anywhere, at anytime, and deny you the rights guaranteed to you in the Bill of Rights, if they can provide "minimal justification".

So, for all intents and purposes, The Bill of Rights has been suspended under President Bush.

And, the answer to your question is "Yes, that should scare the Hell out of you."

The Dark Horse
Months ago, I remember hearing that exactly one person other than George Bush had officially declared himself as a candidate in the 2004 Presidential campaign. And that was Howard Dean, the outgoing governor of Vermont.

And I laughed. I mean, the same way I laughed when I heard Senator Bob Smith of New Hamphire was quitting the Republican party after ripping it on the Senate floor before running for President as an independent in 2000. You'll notice that Senator Bob Smith is now Bob Smith, the guy who got his ass handed to him in the campaign, came crawling back to the Republican party, only to get run out of office by John Sununu. In other words, Howard Dean was a joke and was only going to embarass himself.

But, then, that was before the entire population of Washington D.C. opened an exploratory committe to run for President in 2004. It's starting to sound a bit like Wil Smith on that old Jazzy Jeff & Fresh Prince track, "I Think I Can Beat Mike Tyson", with everybody and their cock-eyed grandmothers waking up in the morning saying "I can beat 'em!!!!"

And, as much as I like John Edwards (see below), I do worry that he may be a one-trick pony. So, I started looking at all the people who I thought were jokes in this race, just in case there was something I was overlooking.

Newsflash: after careful consideration, I've come to the conclusion that Dick Gephardt is still, in fact, a joke.

Howard Dean, on the other hand, is a different story.

Or, perhaps I should say Doctor Howard Dean, the longest serving Democratic governor in the country (11 years), who is pro-choice, wants to unto the entire Bush tax cut, runs the 1st state to legalize same-sex marriages, but still has an A-rating from the NRA and thinks the world is a mess right now because our foreign policy and trade policy do not support each other from a common vision.

Did I mention that 4 of our last 5 Presidents (G.W. Bush, Slick Willie, Reagan, & Jimmy Carter), covering 26 years of electoral seasons, were governors, and the last sitting senator to win the White House was JFK?

Howard Dean is NOT a joke. Read. Because the brother needs your money.
Bad.

When Xerox Rules All
And now, a nerd-gasm moment.

This article from The New Scientist talks about the current drive in circuit board research to combine 3-D printers (i.e. machines that create 3-D objects buy spitting out molded layers that eventually stack up to create a 3-D object) with embedded electronics, where the material itself is capable of carrying a current in a directed fashion without the need to manually add copper wiring to its surface. The end result would be something like a printer that can spontaneously generate disposable light bulbs or remote controls. One of the scientists interviewed said he's really looking forward to printable robots.

My mind is suddenly filled with images of those old cartoons where characters would turn on a faucet and, instead of water, a car would pour out.

Down from the Mountain Top
Here's a series of articles the New York Times published recently, following ten individuals whose lives are modern day reflections on the Ten Commandments. They include stories like the child of an adulterous affair who grew up in abusive foster homes and is now struggling to be a responsible father on his own with no role models, a girl who obsessively idolized the rock band Phish so much that she basically lived as a nomadic hermit as she followed their tours around the country, and a Vietnam vet who led ambuses where he and his team personally killed hundreds of people who is now trying to find absolution as a priest & chaplain for the Army. Beyond the fact that this is some of the best journalistic writing I've seen in recent memory, it's also an interesting treatise on how how these Biblical edicts illustrate issues that remain at the center of human existance, despite the passage of time.

As I side note, I'd heard somewhere that the actual 10 commandments where really single words or characters in Hebrew or Yiddish or whatever it is they wrote in those days, so something like "I am the Lord your God" is represented as a single character etched in stone. Assuming this is true, this is a stark contrast to the 2nd set of commandments that the Hebrews received, now contained in Deuteronomy & Leviticus, which are much more legalistic and, clearly, culturally specific. Makes me wonder if they were all really written by the same hand. I mean, really, why would God issue an appendix? It's not like that whole Red Tent thing just slipped his mind the first time around.

Bush Fears Edwards
24 hours after Sen. John Edwards (D-North Carolina) announced he was running for President of the United States, the Republican National Committee issued this statement, clocked in at around 10 pages, ripping the freshman legislator.

Notice, that, when John Kerry, John Dean, or Dick Gephardt announced their candidacy, there were no such statements of this kind or magnitude. If this guy is such a lightweight, as suggested by this annotated press release that can be found at the very top of the RNC's webpage, above the announcement about Bush's economic stimulus package, why is he drawing so much fire?

Fear has such a distinctive smell.

Look for Bush to pull a Gray Davis in the Democratic Presidential Primary, i.e. since he's presumably running unopposed for the Republican nomination, El Presidente will drop a ton of money into the Democratic Primary states aimed directly at Edwards in hopes of knocking him out in favor of a weaker opponent (someone like Gephardt). It's a tactic that, to my knowledge, originated with Richard Nixon and his under-the-table efforts to support Hubert Humphreys instead of groovy peacenik Eugene McCarthy. Governor Davis just raised the shamelessness quotient to Olympian levels last year, which is why he was sworn in for a 2nd term yesterday instead of Richard Riordan.

But I digress.

You think that guy Edwards might be onto something?

Manhattan was just the beginning...
After the United States government crushed and basically enslaved the various Native American nations of this country in the late 19th Century, they cut a deal with them where the Department of the Interior would manage the captured lands on behalf of the Indians and provide them with the proceeds of any profits gained from business and real estate transactions on the land.

Is anyone surprised to hear that our government has since spent the last 120 years cheating the Native Americans out of nearly $140 BILLION (yes, that's right. BILLION, with a "B")?

This New York Times article talks about the noble lawsuit that the Native Americans have brought against the Department of the Interior. But, in a way, suing the government is alot like David asking Goliath to stab himself. The day G.W. Bush OKs any kind of equitable settlement for this dispute is the day, quite frankly, that I might have to change my tune and vote for that dude.

Exactly. It's NEVER going to happen. But, at least the truth is out.

Getting Medieval Again
When I grow up, I want to be Quentin Tarantino.

And it's not just because of my inherent love for megalomaniacs.

He, probably more than any other artist, single-handedly defined filmmaking in the 90's. I mean, people use words like "Tarantino-esque", in the same way that others use the term "Hitchcockian". Without Reservoir Dogs & Pulp Fiction, there probably is no Scream, no Seven, no Usual Suspects, no Trainspotting, no Lock, Stock & Two Smoking Barrels, etc. And, let's not forget that Quentin's pen is responsible for the original script for Natural Born Killers, which Oliver Stone used to dissect the entire universe of films that Tarantino had spawned.

A storyteller first. He just traded MS Word for an Arriflex camera. My kind of guy.

Having said that, his latest, upcoming film, Kill Bill, where Uma Thurman becomes a bad-girl cross between Charles Bronson & Bruce Lee, is HIGH on my list for 2003. Plus, it's soundtrack marks the first ever collaboration between The Wu-Tang Clan and Metallica.

What's not to love?

A Tale of Two Articles
The Iraqi foreign minister, Tariq Aziz, accused the United States of planning to invade Iraq, whether the UN Inspectors find any hidden weapons or not. Here's an article talking about this from CNN.

Now, here's another article talking about the same statement from Tariq Aziz from the BBC.

What you may notice is that, in the BBC article, they quote Aziz as stating that the US wants to invade Iraq to control it's oil reserves to appease the imperialist intentions of the American business community. CNN makes no mention of such a statement, at all. Odd, considering that CNN is owned by AOL/Time-Warner, one of the largest members of said imperialist business comunity.

See, it's things like this that really demonstrate just how transparent Bush's goals are. Sadly, it also shows how narrow, uninformed, and easily swayed the POV of the average American citizen is, too.

What They Really Think
Here's a nifty little website that actually compiles the voting records of virtually every elected government official and comes up with an issues profile. Just something to help you separate their legislative substance from the everyday B.S.

The Truth Is In There
For the longest time, I didn't even believe in the existence of Area 51. Just more grist for the conspiracy nut mill. Well, the Leader of the Free World has determined that, whatever the Air Force is up to over there, they shouldn't have to burden themselves with little things like not polluting the environment. It's things like this that make me wonder: just where is the line between protecting the national security interests of the nation and protecting the collective butts of the poor, immoral, or irresponsible actions of our representative government?

Scared Straight
Charles Rangel, Democratic congressman from New York City, is talking about introducing a bill that will require mandatory military service for ALL citizens.

That scares the Hell out of me.

And, ultimately, I guess that's the point. Clearly Congressman Rangel's been reading Starship Troopers and is hoping that we end up with a more peace-seeking foreign policy if Jenna & Barbara Bush have to trade in their blonde locks for a G.I.Jane buzz-cut.

On the other hand, let's not kid ourselves: It's not like the military is a meritocracy. All men are NOT created equal. If I'd done Marine ROTC at Princeton, I would have joined the Corps with a commission as a 2nd lieutenant, and my cousin, 12 years my senior and a Marine since he was 18, would have had to follow the orders of me and other pampered college boys like myself. Does my Ivy League education really make me more qualified to send men to their deaths than a man who's spent his entire adult life in the trenches with his fellow soldiers? The elite will ALWAYS find a way to stay away from the bullets.

Jack Chat
I'm so attached to the idea of Jack Nicholson as a rapacious matinee icon, from some of my favorite films like Batman, The Shining, & A Few Good Men, that it's painfully easy to forget that the man is, first and foremost, an artist. Here he is, in a rare one on one interview at EW.com, talking about how he's melded his celebrity into his craft, and how an ashtray full of torn-up money may be his single most evocative piece of work. Oh, and I hear his new movie, About Schmidt, isn't bad, either. I'll let you know after I check it out.

When the term "Republican" meant more than just a party affiliation...
The U.S. Historical Society wants to put a statue of Abraham Lincoln in Richmond, Virginia, the former capital of the Confederate States of America. And the Sons of Confederate Veterans are mad.

And, in other news, water is still wet.

But, on a serious note: It has always struck me as the highest form of revisionist history when modern-day Confederate sympathizers depict the North as a morally bankrupt agressor. After all, didn't the Confederacy shoot at Ft. Sumter first? More importantly, wasn't the entire foundation of the Confederacy predicated on the Southern states' desire to maintain their slave labor force? What's there to be proud of, when your ancestors made an immoral stand and then received a resounding ass-kicking for it? I look forward to the day when some prominent Southern politician publicly rebukes and renounces the heritage of the Confederacy.

Moreover, I'm curious to see if the upcoming Warner Bros. film, Gods and Generals, will have any commentary on the ethics of the Confederacy, or simply take the revisionists' favorite route of depicting the "War Between The States" as a mere philosophical disagreement that escalated out of anyone's control? We shall see.....

"Press The Button..."
You Presidential history buffs out there should know who Daniel Ellsberg is, even if you don't. In the late '60's, Ellsberg worked in the Pentagon under Robert McNamara, Secretary of Defense for Lyndon Johnson and remained through the earliest days of Richard Nixon's administration. Ellsberg conducted reams of research on the impact & overall effectiveness of the Vietnam War, both from his desk and while dodging bullets in Indo-China. The end result of his research? The war is unwinnable, and the Presidents involved, going all the way back to Eisenhower, know it. When Ellsberg heard that Nixon planned on escalating the war to possibly thermonuclear levels, he resigned his post and, in a blatant violation of the law, published the contents of his research in the New York Times. The so-called "Pentagon Papers" were the first set of documents to illustrate in graphic detail that Presidents can make mistakes that cost the lives of American citizens, largely in the interests of "maintaining the prestige of the United States of America" (i.e. their own ego and self-image). Needless to say, in this snippet from The Atlantic Monthly, he has a few choice words of advice for our current commander-in-chief. As of two weeks ago, Ellsberg was sitting in a New York City jail after he and a few hundred religious leaders were arrested for protesting the pending war with Iraq in front of the American mission to the U.N.

Root Problem Quote of the Day

"What's the matter with the people of South Carolina? That's what I'm questioning. In all due respect, I loved my father, who died at 83. But at age 81, I wouldn't have wanted him making decisions that would have the bearing of the world security and the nation with it. This guy's brought in with bottles attached to him half the time."

- outgoing Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura, who thinks the real issue isn't what Trent Lott said about Strom Thurmond, but why Thurmond is even still in office to begin with.