We Three Jerks Exclusive!
Stills from the second Paris Hilton sex tape! My sources say it reveals the horny heiress' ailurophilia and kinky tree fetish, in the now-familiar night-vision setting. Paris' feline co-star is reportedly in talks with the WB network to host a sexy new reality show tentatively titled "Puss N Booty".

Oh, wait, that's my cat under the Christmas tree. Ah, well.

Marc

Brrrr...
Hey Draper, Liz pointed out something funny: On your page, the ads at the top are all for heating pads and such, because you write so much about being cold. Tell Joe we missed him at the Senator last night. ZUZU'S PETALS!

Marc

Back to the ol' Salt Mine
I had a steel tariff post all set until I read Marc's. Scooped again. However, I do have some news regarding plans in East Baltimore to raize an entire neighborhood in order to clear space for biotech industries. I think the plan's risky, and the benefits are far from guaranteed, but I think it might just work out. Although I'm generally pessimistic about massive economic overhauls with long odds, East Baltimore has been in dire straits for some time, and all other conventional means of help have failed. This plan is a tall order to fill, and if it's a failure it will not only hurt the city and its residents, but O'Malley's political future as well. I think it bodes well for O'Malley that he's taking on such a project when he's preparing to launch a gubernatorial bid in the not-to-distant future. After all, if he just ignored the problems of East Baltimore a little longer he could have run for governor and nobody would have accussed him of failing East Baltimore, because nobody expects action. As a citizen of Baltimore and a political observer, I take O'Malley's action as a sign of his confidence in the idea and his committment to try to figure out ways to help the city, even when nobody expects him to.

Okay, it's Monday. You know what that means. Norman Chad, baby. This week he breaks down all the NFL coaches on the chopping block. And speaking of sports, I've been unable to determine whether Annika played from the Men's tee or not during the Skins game. The WashPost article I've linked too doesn't make it clear. I'm going to search for it later, and possibly write a question to PTI, but if anybody finds real proof either way, post it.

Finally, because Sundays help me get through the week, I've checked the upcoming football schedule. My prediction is that we'll get the Ravens and Bengals at one on CBS, and if we get a FOX one o'clock it could be Skins and Giants OR Dallas and Phila. At four o'clock, if CBS gives us a 4 we could get Jets - Bills, OR KC - Denver, OR Miami - New England. If, as I expect, CBS does a Ravens post game show, then we'll get the only 4 o'clock that FOX will offer: Arizona and the 49ers.

Tony

P.S. I saw It's a Wonderful Life at the Senator last night. It was one of the better movie-going experiences I've had. It really was something to experience the movie with a theater full of people instead a living room full of family. The movie was certainly funnier, and probably a little more heartwarming than it usually is. Also, Donna Reed was a stone-cold fox.

TMQ Returns
And I didn't even realize it. It's on NFL.com here. I don't know if this is the permanent address or what. Enjoy.

Marc

Issue #3: What Did You Have For Breakfast?
WRONG! You all had Special K with banana.

From the Post via Instapundit:
Bush has decided to repeal the steel tariffs. Huzzah! The Post speculates that this will hurt him in steel producing states like Pennsyltucky and West by God Virginia, but help in Michigan, where auto manufacturers use steel. Hopefully W learns a lesson from this one.

Also from the Post via Kausfiles:
Kerry and Lieberman were the only two Senators not to vote on the prescription drug benefit. What a couple of weenies! As Kaus points out, the whole reason Kerry telecommuted to the Des Moines debate was so that he could vote on the damn bill. This reminds me of all the "abstains" from SGA - except these guys want to be president, where you might have to make a few tough choices.

Also, a shout out to Senators Lott, Sununu, Nickles, and McCain for voting against this geriatric welfare scheme. And further praise to John McCain (oh, how it pains me to say that) for calling attention to this administration's "spending like a drunken sailor" on Fox News Sunday.

Marc

I may make a map of this
About a week ago Marc and I discussed NFL teams who have their script logo right below the NFL shield in thier jerseys. Well, in either a testament to how much I screw around at work, or an example of how dedicated I am to solving the great mysteries of life, I've compiled a list.

The breakdown is almost 50-50. In fact, there are 15 teams that wear their script log below the shield, and 17 teams that do not. There's really nothing to be inferred from this data; no great wisdom or insight about the NFL can be gained by knowing this. It is, simply and purely, trivial. But that's why you love me.

Teams with script logo:
Redskins, Eagles, Rams, Giants, Buccaneers, Dolphins, Broncos, Titans, Falcons, Ravens, Seahawks, Browns, Patriots, Lions, and Texans.

Teams without script logo:
Bills, Chargers, Bengals, Bears, Cardinals, Chiefs, Raiders, Saints, Jets, Jaguars, Vikings, Panthers, Cowboys, Steelers, Colts, Packers, 49ers.

The lists have some surprises. For example, newly formed franchises Jax and Carolina have gone script-less, while long-standing teams Browns, Lions and Redskins have gone with the script. The only thing I think I can say about this data is just that, for the most part, teams with new or recently revamped uni's go for the script as a nod toward modernism (i.e. Eagles, Broncos, Falcons, Seahawks), but not always (i.e. 49ers, Bills).

Now, I know what you're saying. How does this data break down in terms of division? I'm one step ahead of you.

AFC
North:2 teams
South:2 teams
East:2 teams
West:1 team (tied with NFC North for fewest teams with script logo)

NFC
North:1 team
South:2 teams
East:3 teams (most in any division)
West:2 teams

Since this is probably my last post until Saturday, Happy Thanksgiving,
Tony

The Democratic Dinosaur
There is a very interesting piece in today's Washington Post about the Republicans recent Medicare victory. Putting aside the issue, the article examines what it means to both sides, politically. The point being that the Medicare victory was indicative of the Republicans unity and the Democrats dissonance. I've actually made reference to this in a slightly different way in the past. It's my belief that the Democratic party is at a disadvantage, at least legislatively, because their ranks are dominated by lawyers and the Republicans have more people from the private sector. Those buisness-minded Republicans are bottom-line and victory obsessed, whereas Democratic lawyers are usually more interested in protracted talks with little in the way of concrete yields (See Clinton, Hillary, & Lindsey, Bruce, i.e. Whitewater). They also seem to be, outside of the Christian Right, the more ideologically stubborn of the two. This prevents compromise, which is the key to being able to even share in contemporary American legislative victories.

Longtime party activist and strategist Harold Ickes, who worked for Clinton, sees this as the sorta start of a process where the wheels are coming off and the Democrats are facing being relegated into a permanent non-governing third party. After all, the AARP jumped ship and the Republicans were able to stake a claim to Medicare, perhaps the biggest (with the possible exception of Social Security) issue the Dems had. I'd like to see them use this as an opportunity to shake up the party and reach out to dissafected young voters, conceding the elderly to the Republicans and focusing on other voters. But old people are such a crucial voting bloc, and young people are so unreliable when it comes to voting, that this is unlikely to occur. What will probably happen is the Democrats will continue to compete for the same voters, and will do so on issues which the Republicans will now have the upper hand. A gloomy future for the party of Jackson indeed.

Not to totally bum you out, but there's bad news in the area of microchips being imbedded into human beings.

Tony

Are you ready for some Turducken?
I've got a couple of quick links and then some very exciting news regarding this Thursday's NFL games. First, however, I direct you once again to Norman Chad's ruminations about the BCS. Next, Dana Milbank has an interesting column comparing Bush to Nixon, at least stylistically. I think her comparisions are a little weak, for example saying that Bush is similiar to Nixon because both focus on White House staff, rather than cabinent officials, in terms of centralizing power throughout the administation. Nixon destroyed the cabinent-based form of government, and every President since Nixon has centralized power in the White House. This is not unique to Bush.

Now for the interesting stuff. This year's Thanksgiving games will once again be throwback games. The Pack will wear Lombardi-era threads, while the Lions will once again throw-back to the thirties. The Cowboys will wear the 1960-inspired blue jersey with white stars on the sleaves, and the Dolphins will go with their 70's white duds.

NFL.com has throwback logos for almost every team up on their site for the week. And, check this article from Packers.com for a detailed description of how the throwbacks different from the contemporary unis.

Happy Throwback Jersey Day, everybody!
Tony

The joys of Living in Beirut, er Baltimore
Well, what place this world is. As you all know, I live in Charles Village, one of the Islands of humanity in this cess city. There are places like this all over the city, tiny enclaves of white people, and upper middle class homesteaders, and businesses that don't sell cigarettes by the single, or lake trout (fried carp), and some (few) of the 70% of the population that is lucky enough to not live somewhere where shootings are just a soundtrack to the evening. Anyway.

So, I'm walking over to the coffee place after my training session at the Rocky Run (see previous posts, this place does belong in a mall, but, anyway)and I see all kinds of cop cars, and ambulances, and the ubiquitous JHU police hanging around outside of the building that the coffee place is in. I turn to go into the door and I see emt's and cops and plain clothes cops (detectives, I guess, you know like Lenny Briscoe) and a woman on a stretcher with blood all over her face and her head in a bandage.

I get inside and inquire to my regular coffee bringer what happened. Turns out, some stupidly desparate person held up the blimpie in the same building and on his way out decided to wack this woman with his gun. She was just in the hallway on the phone. Some shit. I mean, first, to go into this gigantic Hopkins-esque complex and fucking rob a blimpie (with a gun) at 7 in the evening...just not what you would expect. It's like, because this neighborhood lulls you into thinking that you're safe. That somehow those imaginary neighborhood boundries mean something to scumbags...just a wake up call. And I thought the worst part was living with the rats in the alley.

On a completely different note, I like gin. It crucified me last night, and it was good.

F. Scott Draper

Fair And Balanced
Jay Rosen runs PressThink, a very perceptive site focused on political journalism. He summarizes the appeal of Fox News thusly:

For the bored, more excitement. (This was his biggest gambit.) For angry conservatives, angry conservatives. For nonideological audiences fed up with liberal sanctimony, less liberal sanctimony. For those weary of political correctness, almost none. For news hounds, some-- enough news to stick around for the fireworks. For men, blondes. For Republican women, Britt Hume. For zappers, a faster pace. For nodders, music a touch louder and graphics a touch grabbier.

For nativists, nativism. For the paranoid, a message: no, you're not crazy. For the opinionated, lots of people who are opinionated. For Amercans, the flag. For the red states, a red state news source. For the kids who watch Jon Stewart, something at least continuous with the spectrum of smirk. For talk radio's legions, a similar environment in video. For people interested in ideas, more people with license to spout ideas. For the Bush White House, a friendly forum. For the occasional guest from NPR, a chance to feel outnumbered. For liberals, news that is no more intolerable than CNN is for conservatives. (Yes, liberals watch Fox too.) And for the tabloid mind in all of us, the tabloid mind over news.

Marc

The Ol' Ball And Chain
Ha! You thought that was going to say "The Ol' Ballcoach", didnt' you? David Brooks (the NYT's house conservative) has written a very thoughtful tribute to marriage. In addition to bothering Glenn Reynolds, Brooks' piece also inspired me, being recently married, to reflect on the institution.

Brooks says:

Anybody who has several sexual partners in a year is committing spiritual suicide. He or she is ripping the veil from all that is private and delicate in oneself, and pulverizing it in an assembly line of selfish sensations.

But marriage is the opposite. Marriage joins two people in a sacred bond. It demands that they make an exclusive commitment to each other and thereby takes two discrete individuals and turns them into kin.

Few of us work as hard at the vocation of marriage as we should. But marriage makes us better than we deserve to be. Even in the chores of daily life, married couples find themselves, over the years, coming closer together, fusing into one flesh. Married people who remain committed to each other find that they reorganize and deepen each other's lives. They may eventually come to the point when they can say to each other: "Love you? I am you."

I think being married has made me a better person - although that obviously has a lot to do with who I married. So, when I tell you swinging single cats to mount every willing female (or male) in sight, you should probably disregard my words (you know, like usual), and watch what I do.

Brooks goes on to make the conservative case for gay marriage:

The conservative course is not to banish gay people from making such commitments. It is to expect that they make such commitments. We shouldn't just allow gay marriage. We should insist on gay marriage. We should regard it as scandalous that two people could claim to love each other and not want to sanctify their love with marriage and fidelity.

When liberals argue for gay marriage, they make it sound like a really good employee benefits plan. Or they frame it as a civil rights issue, like extending the right to vote.

Marriage is not voting. It's going to be up to conservatives to make the important, moral case for marriage, including gay marriage. Not making it means drifting further into the culture of contingency, which, when it comes to intimate and sacred relations, is an abomination.

I agree with Brooks that marriage is a definite benefit, both to the married couple, and to society at large. I also agree that gays should be allowed to marry. BUT - not by the state.

I think the government should have no place in the marriage process. The fact that government does have such a place is what makes the gay marriage controversy so divisive and bitter. If the state (with its coercive powers derived from a monopoly of the legitimate use of force) had no role in marriage, yours or my opinion on what two gay people should do would be irrelevant. Anybody, straight, gay, polygamous, could declare themselves married and no one could stop them. How could you?

It would be impossible to say "you aren't really married", because there would be no government standard for 'official' marriages. Marriage would be a contract like any other. Church types might not like this, and probably a lot of gays would not either. Both sides of this controversy are trying to use the power of the state to impose their beliefs on others by force - which is what I am against, not any particular definition of marriage.

My marriage does not derive its legitimacy from the state. What makes my marriage legitimate is that it was a covenant, freely agreed to by two consenting adults, with each other and with God. Nothing the state can do affects that covenant. As they say, "What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder".

Marc

This Makes Me Cool, Right?
This is my LEGO version of a Madvac street cleaning machine. The driver is modeled after Tony's stepfather, who used to drive one of these things.

I was inspired to build this on my honeymoon in Montreal, when I made Liz stop and take pictures of one we saw on the street. There are two pictures of Liz and I together, and two pictures of a street cleaning machine.

Marc

New Coke
LEGO has stunningly validated the Orndoff Principle by changing at least four of their traditional colors, supposedly based on consumer research, focus groups, etc. Nevermind that these colors have been in use for years (over 20 years in the case of light gray). Fucking idiots.

I have been emailing and calling LEGO to bitch about this for the past few days, as well as arguing with other nerds on LUGNET, so you can see why I haven't had much time for blogging. On the bright side, this will free up a lot more money for non-LEGO expenditure.

Marc

Does this make hockey cooler?
No, but it certainly makes it colder. Tonight in Edmonton, the Oilers and the Canadiens are going to play the first ever NHL game to be held outside. A stunt from a faltering league? Yes. Worth watching? Probably not. Interesting? No, not really. Sorry

Tony

Saturday Morning Cartoons
There's controversy in the funny pages. Last week's B.C. comic, written by reknown evangelical Christian Johnny Hart, has raised the ire of some Muslim groups for a supposed anti-Islamic slur. What do you think?

The crescent moons are suppossed to represent Islam, and the word "slam" is spelled out in a column, which could represent "Islam." I'm usually not one to buy into hidden meanings, (i.e. "Sloop John B" being about Vietnam) but without the Islamic overtones, this strip is just not funny. But then again, B.C.'s never funny, so maybe I'm a bad judge.

In other cartoon news Family Guy may be returning for a new season next year, based on the strength of its cable ratings and DVD sales. (Thanks loyal reader E. Nelson of Baltimore, MD) If it happens, it will be the first time ever a show comes back to air based on DVD or video sales.

Tony