5.12.03
Web Coding and Blogger: I have been screwing around with the template some more. You will see the Bush news feed I put up, to support, in my own small way (and only initially) his reelection. If you are viewing this from Netscape, you may (or, then again, you may not) see a couple of links between the linked articles and the obligatory statement saying who paid for it. I have been screwing around with the template for the better part of an hour; I have found that, in Netscape, I don't have any problem when I'm looking at a preview, but when I look at the real thing, it comes out all warped, and those three links are gone, because the background of that particular field is almost or the same as the font colour. I deduced that it has something to do with the table up top, but I can't figure out how. Other blogger sites, like this one are read fine by me under Netscape.
So here's my fix: This page designed for Internet Explorer 5 and up.
Ugh. I hate saying it. But, given the fact that I have no problems reading it with IE (and the frustration I had making it perfect for NS) made me decide to take the easy road.
More later. Enjoy your Fridays - R.
4.12.03
College Football: Miami beat Bowling Green badly, so I'm 0-1 with my college football picks for the weekend. To be completely honest, I haven't been keeping track of how I've done this season. I could, of course, go back and look, but I'm too lazy, and that would be too much work for me. In any case Miami just won themselves the MAC title. And Bowling Green couldn't get it done at home like I thought they might. Good for the Redhawks. Now they get Louisville. And the Motor City Bowl is free to pick whoever it wants, whether it is a very good BG team, or a very good Northern Illinois, or a good Toledo team. Or even a mediocre Marshall team, if they really want. Up to them.
Politics: So here's my question: if goofy pop-quiz type things are out of bounds for the president, then why are ordinary people subjected to goofy political pop-quiz type things?
I am, as we speak, listening to a rebroadcast of today's Sean Hannity show. He just asked a spokesman for "Babes Against Bush" to name the Vice President which the spokesman (a woman, actually) refused and hung up, right on the air, right before a c-break. Now, I think that everyone should know who their constitutional officers are, and that includes any local officials whose position is defined by a state constitution (here in Virginia, the posts of sheriff, commonwealth's attorney, and commissioner of revenue are three offices that localities are required by constitution to have). Hannity seems big on this, as he does the goofball "Man on the Street"
On the sidebar I recently posted a "Blogs for Bush" link in my Blogroll, and I posted a G.W. Bush news ticker (and advertisement) in the Links section of the sidebar. I have done this for the simple fact that I believe that Dubya, despite his myriad policy flaws, is the best candidate in the field. His tax cuts have led to an economic explosion (8.2% annual rate of economic growth in the 3rd Q 2003). He believes (for the most part) in free trade, thus opening economic opportunities both here and abroad. Of the candidates, he is the only one who will prosecute the war on terror, unlike those who would have us retreat prematurely before the battle is won by giving control to international organisations who would run at the first sign of trouble.
Certainly, he has his problems. I have spoken at length about the hideous abomination that Medicare is. Of the five largest increases in the history of the federal budget, two came when this country fought for its life in the Second World War. The other three have come during this administration, thus giving truck to the charge that, while Democrats may be "tax-and-spend", Republicans (at least the moderate ones, as well as the spineless ones in the Congress) could be best described as "borrow-and-spend". The implication here is that, of the two parties, the Democrats are the better party, simply because they are forthright about what their unrestrained spending costs!!!.
Vote Dubya in '04.
More later - R.
3.12.03
College Football: In bowl news, the only thing which is anything close to important is that Ole Miss is going to the Cotton Bowl (registration required). I, a huge college football fanatic, am only mildly interested to hear that Tulsa is travelling to Boise, or that Boise State is travelling to Fort Worth. I thought that the WAC negotiated all these bowl contracts to keep their teams at home for the bowls, especially Boise. Why the hell would anyone want to go to Boise for the New Year? I thought that was a bowl game specifically for Boise State.
Since there are only seven games this weekend, I figure that I can pick them all.
First, the final regular-season games:
Notre Dame travels to Syracuse. The winner is bowl-eligible, even though it doesn't appear that there will be a bowl for the winner, especially if Syracuse wins. So, in effect, this is both teams' bowl game. Of course, this leads me to ask, like I did earlier in this column, who, exactly, wants to travel to Syracuse in December? I can't imagine that there are more than, oh, 6 feet of snow on the ground up there. In any case, this is a game about which I have little interest, because I dislike both teams. I guess I'll take Notre Dame, simply because their schedule has been brutal, whereas Syracuse has played scrubs, and went 2-5 in the Big Least, losing last week by 17 at Rutgers.
Southern Cal beats Oregon State. That game is in Los Angeles, and the Trojans understand that a win puts them, most likely, in the Sugar Bowl. They will be suitably motivated, and Oregon State's postseason has already been determined: I forget where they're going, but it's one of those bowls with no import whatsoever. So, while they may be playing for pride or whatever, they really don't give a good crap.
Boise State has been walking all over the WAC for the last two seasons. They have, thus far, gone undefeated in conference and are a much better team than Hawaii. So it really doesn't matter that the game is on Oahu (I think) - Boise State beats Hawaii.
Army - Navy is this weekend, and I will certainly tune in. Traditionally, this week is wild at both schools, with plebes being allowed (so long as they get away with it) to pull stunts on the upperclassmen, with the upperclassmen, umm..., instilling spirit in the plebes, and hearing "Beat (insert rival here)" early, late and extremely often (I learned all of this by reading John Feinstein's book A Civil War. Navy will travel to the Houston Bowl win or lose, and Army will go home for their postseason. But this game is easily the biggest on both teams' schedules. The only game which may, but probably wouldn't, be bigger for either of these schools would be the national championship. Both of these teams are proud, disciplined warriors. It is possible that the seniors on this year's teams will fight alongside each other next year in Iraq, which is another facet of the rivalry, one which demands respect from the rivals. So both teams will play hard, and a win will make their seasons - even if it is the only one of the season, as would be the case with Army. However, Paul Johnson understands the service academy mentality, having been the offensive coordinator under Charlie Weatherbie in the mid '90s; Johnson has also proven he can win, bringing a title to I-AA Georgia Southern before rejoining the Mids. Army's season, however, is all but lost. They fired their coach, Todd Berry, in midseason, and haven't yet won a game. Certainly this game would make their season, but I see Navy winning and winning big, and capturing the Commander-in-Chief trophy for the first time since the George Welsh era back in the early '80s.
Now, on to the conference championships, two of which are rematches, and all of which are being played in a location within an hour's drive of one of the two competitors:
First, tomorrow night is the MAC championship. This game is being played at the winner of the Western division, Bowling Green. Miami comes in having gone undefeated in conference play. Bowling Green comes in having only one loss in conference play: they lost at Miami. So Miami goes in knowing that they can win. Bowling Green goes in knowing that they're playing at their place now, and looking for revenge. Both teams are very good, with each team's nonconference loss coming at the hands of the Big Ten on the road: Miami lost badly in their first game at Iowa, and Bowling Green lost by a touchdown at Ohio State. So both teams are comparable. Since my parents are Miami alumni, I'm rooting hard for the Redhawks. However, I see the Falcons winning, based primarily on the home field advantage and Bowling Green's desire for revenge (and despite the ass-ugly uniforms...they look like some sort of unholy mixture of things that come out of one's body after a hard night's drinking).
In the Big XII, Oklahoma travels to Kansas City to face Kansas State; KC is about an hour's hard drive from Manhattan, so one presumes the stands will be filled with Wildcat partisans. This game also has some bad blood, as Bob Stoops of OU left Bill Snyder's staff a few years ago to go to OU. Everyone's saying, in some sort of pro forma way, that even if OU loses they still go to the Sugar Bowl. But here's the thing: they won't lose. Oklahoma under Stoops is the best big-game team in the country. Kansas State under Snyder is, very possibly, the worst. So, despite the fact that Oklahoma is playing, for all intents and purposes, on the road, they'll beat K-State.
Finally, we come to the Southeastern Conference championship, featuring another rematch in LSU vs Georgia, and being played in Atlanta, less than an hour from Athens. So, like the previous game, it will have all sorts of home team partisans. Add to this that a plurality (if not outright majority) of Georgia fans are from Atlanta or its suburbs, and this equates to home field advantage. Georgia, like Bowling Green, is playing at home and looking for revenge. When they played LSU earlier in the year, Billy Bennett missed three field goals which would have given Georgia the win. Also, when they played, Georgia was banged up, if I remember correctly. Now, however, they're healthy. And at home. And looking for revenge. And looking to go to a BCS bowl. I could keep going, but all of these motivating factors outweigh LSU's motivator: an outside chance to go to the Sugar Bowl. So Georgia wins the SEC for the second straight year.
Zuletzt: To comment on my Zuerst, I find myself ogling more women than I would have in the past, and doing so more openly. My big question is this: is that a good thing or a bad thing? I find myself feeling vaguely guilty over things like "objectification", etc. Maybe I just need to get laid.
More later.
2.12.03
College Football: Am I supposed to be surprised? Right now, KJ has accumulated the third-most rushing yards in the history of the program. He's only about 400 or so yards behind Cyrus Lawrence, Tech's all time rushing leader. It would be possible that, were he to stay for his senior season, KJ would get the record before conference play even started.
Perhaps, more to the point, he's an awesome talent, a Doak Walker finalist and may well travel to New York as a Heisman finalist (even though he won't win). And even more germane than that, he may well be a top ten pick in the draft. All of these things compel him to come out, I know. But I don't like it any more than I did when Michael Vick came out. I certainly understand it, and I don't begrudge either Vick or Jones (or players like Ike Charlton or Shyrone Stith) coming out early, if they feel (however mistakenly, as in the 7th rounder Stith's case) it's in their best interests.
One of the members of the SEC got around to hiring a black coach. Mississippi State, which about 40 years ago, snuck out of the state to play in a NCAA tournament game against a team with black players - then against state law - hired the first black football coach in the 70 year history of the Southeastern Conference. Ivan Maisel that it's the right thing to do. Maisel argues that MSU AD Mike Slive did the right thing in hiring Croom, but by mentioning only at the end of his introduction the barrier that was broken he "buried the lead". Yeah, maybe. But maybe Mississippi State has the right idea, just like they did when they played that illegal basketball game 40 years ago. That idea being that skin colour isn't important; the important things are character traits, unique to each individual: character, courage, competence. In other words, can the man do the job? Personally, I think so (as does Slive) but only time will tell. Moreover, since part of the collegiate coach's job is recruiting, I think that you have to cut a new coach (whether Croom or, a couple of years ago, Ron Zook) slack and let them coach through their contract of 4 or 5 years. All in all, a good hire for Mississippi State. I am unaware of a better candidate for the Bulldogs.
Going Bowling: So here's my question: which bowls are important in College Football?
Obviously, the Sugar Bowl is important; it, of course, decides a national champion. Since national championships are the highest goals to which collegiate teams can aspire, those games which decide them are, almost by definition, important.
By this criterion, one must add the Divisions I-AA, II, and III national championships, played in Chattanooga, Florence, Ala. and Salem, Va., respectively.
One can make the argument that the other three BCS bowls are also important. Although not nearly as important as the four games mentioned above, they are important in the sense that excellent teams play in them. To play in a BCS bowl, a team must (a) win the championship of a BCS conference or (b) finish in the top 12 in the BCS standings. This means that the team has done one of two meaningful things: won a conference championship (arguably the most meaningful thing outside the national title) or been universally acclaimed by media, coaches and computer formulae as one of the best teams (top 10%) in the nation.
But where from there? By the conference championship criterion, the Liberty Bowl is important based on the fact that it is the only non-BCS bowl to pair conference champions. Should the Gator or Cotton Bowls be counted? Both of these pit BCS-conference runners-up (i.e. both bowls get first pick for both teams after the BCS takes its teams). Should the Cotton Bowl be counted? It oftentimes, too, pits BCS runners-up (in the form of division champions).
Personally, I would argue that the BCS bowls, the other national championships and the Liberty Bowl are important. Of course, there is oftentimes another one or two important bowls: the ones in which your teams take the field. I, of course, blogged yesterday about the Insight Bowl rather than any of the aforementioned bowls (I'll have a full bowl preview before the New Orleans Bowl kicks off 2 weeks from today, for those interested). I did so not because it's important to a vast majority of blog readers (to be honest, I don't give two toots about the Holiday Bowl, for example) but because it's important to me as a Tech fan.
Democratic Idiots,: Power Line links to stories about the faux Israeli-Palestinian accords in Geneva, negotiated by private citizens out of power and out of touch with their respective populaces. One of the interesting things that came out of it was a speech in which ex-President Carter says:
Had I been elected to a second term, with the prestige and authority and influence and reputation I had in the region, we could have moved to a final solution.
Ah, yes, the final solution. Considering that Palestinians have, even now, always - even during your term in office - refused to acknowledge Israel's right to exist, I suspect that the 'final solution' that they had in mind and continue to have in mind today would involve something not terribly different from what happened at the Wannsee Conference in 1942 outside Berlin. You know, Mr President, the Conference which doomed millions of Jews to death by gassing. Perhaps you should have said simply that you supported any effort by the Palestinians to obtain Zyklon B, or perhaps something more modern like tabun or sarin (both of which were used by Sadam Hussein against the Iranians and Kurds, and of which sarin was also used in the Tokyo subway attack a few years ago). I'm not certain that the effect of that statement would have been vastly different from the effect of what you actually said.
Captain's Quarters has a couple of interesting posts about Howard Dean, both regarding an interview Dean did with Chris Matthews. The first link I posted points to Dean running off at the mouth about concentrated ownership of the media; he suggests that he would 'appoint people to the FCC that believe democracy depends on getting information from all portions of the political spectrum'. But the problem is this: Isn't it the right of those who broadcast to determine what they broadcast...or what they don't? Certainly he makes the point that the better democracy (representative republicanism, actually, or constitutional republicanism if you prefer) depends upon the dissemination of information. However, he seems to suggest that he would compel those owners of media outlets to work against their better interests by either (a) selling media outlets or (b) disseminating information with which they do not agree.
The second link regarding Dr Dean refers to international affairs. Dr Dean believes that 'the Soviet Union' should exert pressure on Iran regarding the latter's atomic weapons program; after all, 'the Soviet Union is supplying of the equipment that Iran I believe mostly likely is using to set itself along the path of developing nuclear weapons.' This is weirdly reminiscent of the interview given by President Bush to whatzizname up in Boston, who asked the then-Governor to name the heads of government of those four countries. Of course, the reporter in Boston deliberately asked Bush about that trivia. Here Chris Matthews does no such thing, and Dr Dean talks unprompted of the Soviet Union as a current entity; the last presidential election in which that was the case involved the current president's father. Since Dr Dean's gaffe was the greater on two levels. First, he misstated a country's name. One presumes that President Bush could have said on the campaign trail three years ago that the Soviet Union had split into several separate states. Second, Mr Bush's gaffe was the result of some nameless reporter giving him a pop-quiz. Dr Dean's gaffe was completely and totally unprompted.
Of course, given the party affiliation of each, one could hazard an educated guess at which gaffe received more press.
More later - R.
1.12.03
College Football:
I'm-m-m dreamin' of a Whi-i-ite Christmas ohh, ohh, ohh/
Just like the ones I used to know-w-w/
etc.
Well, the Hokies aren't going to the Tire Bowl or the San Fran Bowl, as I predicted earlier. Because Pitt was taken by the Tire Bowl, the Hokies get a White Christmas. They're going out to the desert, where the White Christmas they'll have is more related to the sand than the snow they would see elsewhere. Apparently, according to multiple sources, they'll face Cal. Okay. So they'll have the chance to prove that they can beat a team that USC couldn't. More, they'll have about 4 weeks to prepare which, given their tailspin over the last 6 games, couldn't have come at a better time. I'll post more on the game as it draws closer.
Pitt will face UVa in the battle of "the teams that beat the Hokies". They do this, fortuitously enough, in the bowl which is closest to Blacksburg - the Tire Bowl in Charlotte. I'd just as well watch a tire fire. To tell the truth, I'd just as well light myself on fire.
Layouts and other crapola: People who design blogspot layout rigorously interrogated and sent to gulag. Comrade Gund give clenched fist salute (thus copying Commissar) to The Bartender, and, of course, to Commissar himself.
In any case, Comrade Gund redesign layout, delineating between links on side and main column; layout seem to work better on bourgeois browser Netscape. Have not tested on reactionary browser Internet Explorer.
Comrade Gund enjoy (as should you) reading Commissar's unvarnished truth exposing capitalist imperialist lies. Comrade Gund not on map of Blogosphere. Comrade Gund blog in kollektiv, rather than in city or large town. It probably no help that Comrade Gund blog about bourgeois fake Amerikan football.
More revolutionary propaganda later, tovarisch.
