G-man's Blog

Where Ya' Been?

2009-10-06T23:12:00.000-04:00

It's been three and a half years since I last posted here, but, hey, no time like the present to restart. Just in time to talk about Hakeem Nicks. The former Tar Heel scored his first NFL regular season touchdown on Sunday for the Giants against Kansas City. Just a short reception but a 50+ yard run after the catch. The last Chief left all of his underwear on the turf...

http://www.nfl.com/videos/new-york-giants/09000d5d81321e61/Hakeem-Nicks-54-yd-TD

Pass The Banana Pudding

2006-03-16T10:54:00.000-05:00

It's NCAA Tournament time. Your brackets are filled out. You're half paying attention at work to work, half to daydreaming about the tournament. And checking those scores and your picks. HOOO EEEE it's almost time. Pass the banana puddin'.

That comes from Roy Williams on his Tar Heels waiting to find out who, where and when they would play...

"As I said earlier, we had all the team over the house for some dessert and I think Wanda, Joe Holladay and myself were the only ones that clapped [when our name appeared]. The rest of our team just sat there and said ‘Oh, well – we’re a three seed, where do we go play?’ I’ve always wanted something you can’t have, because I’ve wanted the team to be excited, but yet to be so good that we expect that … But I thought with so many freshmen they would be excited, but the guys just sat there and said ‘Pass the banana pudding.’”

So here's to the Tar Heels -- the defending NCAA Champions:

Go Heels! Oh, and would you PTBP!

Bring on the Adults

2006-03-14T23:08:00.000-05:00

It's been almost two weeks since an obviously deranged Mohammed Taheri-azar attempted to focus his personal jihad against UNC... oh, wait... against an assembled multitude of persecutory protesters gathered in The Pit ... no? Strike that... against an indescriminate assortment of students and passers by at UNC. I'm confused. Maybe you are too. Taheri-azar was a recent graduate of UNC. Hmm. What, he couldn't get a job in the past couple of months? He must not have been reading through the want ads for ~~C-store~~ ...uh, ~~taxi driver~~ ...er... management or marketing/sales postitions on any number of regional internet websites.

At least he remembered to call 911 and report his accident. I'm not so sure you'll see his name mentioned in any ads from the rental car company who loaned him his ~~weapon~~ uh, Jeep, though. Wonder if he paid with cash or by credit card? Probably won't be featured in any bank card ads, either: "I want to use my miles to go to Chapel Hill?" "NOOOO!" The fact is all nine persons directly shaken up in the botched terrorist attack thankfully ended up alright, due to the fact Taheri-azar was inept at accomplishing his task. See any possible connection to the job question, earlier?

What does not surprise me in the least is the flaccid reaction at ground zero+300 yards (South Building - Campus Administration). It was so typical of the former music teacher turned Chancellor that the "incident" not upset people needlessly. Didn't want to call it what it was. Just like most campus elites who were and still are likely thinking, "besides, we must try to 'understand' what terrible confliction must be going on in the young man to cause him to lash out that way, don't you know". No I don't.

Of course the word "terrorism" wasn't and still likely won't be uttered in any official response, even though the Feds investigating it say it was. The obvious feeling is along the lines of, "we must be cautious to diffuse any potential retaliatory reaction, you see." Um hmm.

What's next? Holding hands around a ~~bonfire~~ ooops, can't do that on campus any more... ~~giant pile of picked wild flowers~~... wait, the environmentalists would have a fit... no, across campus... yeah, that's it... "Hands Across UNC"... and then everyone can sing "Kum ba ya" or even "We Are The World", and feel as if a major breakthrough in international policy has been reached. Must... head... off... any... potential... backlash... against... a... peaceful... religion... (out of breath, sorry) Look, this has nothing to do with Muslims in general, nor the religion of Islam. The problem is as it HAS been: with Islamic fundamentalist-extremist-jihadists.

The "We Are The World" direction does come through in this Daily Tar Heel editorial from last Friday, don't you think?

Yeah, by all means, let's NOT confuse our carefully tailored view of what happened with what Teheri-azar actually said it was. Good grief! Where are the ADULTS in Chapel Hill? Does this kind of reaction make you really feel safe? I hope not. No offense, but it's time to grow a big pair, Meez, and start showing some leadership here. [I can think of the beginning of a speech, if you'd like it... by all means, Chancellor, wrap your mouth around this: "There was and is no excuse whatsoever for that sort of activity on the part of Mr. Teheri-azar, and we intend to see him punished to the fullest extent of the law. No one: no student, no faculty member, staff member, or visitor should EVER feel uncertain about his or her safety on this campus. I have today called for a review of the current security systems, and will personally lead a task force made up of campus, community and state law enforcement and security experts to ensure our campus is made as safe as sanely possible..."] Well, it would be a start, but oh no, much better to take a break and hope the heat dies down by the time classes resume. Good luck on that one.

RIP x 2

2005-12-07T19:45:00.000-05:00

In the past couple of weeks, two men who spent time on the sidelines in Chapel Hill have passed on to the great stadium in the sky. One left Carolina for Annapolis and a 33 year career as an assistant at the Naval Academy. The other went on to become a head coach at the collegiate and professional level, and was known as the architect of the "Steel Curtain" defense of the mighty Pittsburgh Steelers of the '70's -- winners of four Super Bowls.

The first man's son has won three Super Bowls as a head coach, including the last two. Steve Belichick, 86, died November 19th. He had been an assistant at UNC from 1953-55 under George Barclay.

Bud Carson (UNC '52), died Wednesday at 75. He coached at UNC under Jim Tatum ('57-'58), and Jim Hickey ('59-'64). They were both consummate professionals and no doubt were great influences on many young (and not so young) men they coached throughout their careers. Thanks for what you accomplished, and may you both rest in peace.

A Tale... (Part 2)

2005-11-07T19:04:00.000-05:00

Before launching into this past weekend's escapades in College Football Carolina Style, a couple of addendums to last week.

1 - If you think going to Knoxville to play Tennessee isn't difficult, even when the Vols are having an off year, then you've definitely been smoking some illegal weed. With 110 thousand (or is it a million) screaming psycho hillbillies and yacht owners packed into the biggest football stadium in the South, even when UT is having a dud of a season concentration is a problem. But you've got to hand it to Darth Visor (aka Steve Spurrier), he had his a-game going comedy wise, not to mention doing a fine job of keeping his team's eye on the prize. The best line of the week was delivered by Spurrier to UT coach Phil Fulmer: According to the Ol' Ball Coach, "I told Phil, 'I could come in here and kick his ass with Duke!'" Which he did in '89. Did it numerous times with the Gators. Did it last Saturday with the Gamecocks. It ain't braggin' if you can back it up!

2 - Looks like North Carolina's loss at Miami the previous week wasn't really 'bad' after all. Yes, not a good thing to blow a 16-7 halftime lead, but understandable against the 'Canes. And an 18 point loss in Miami doesn't look so bad compared to what Miami did to then #3 ranked Virginia Tech in Blacksburg on Saturday. It was never closer than 0-0. Final score a 27-7 spanking by the Hurricanes -- vaulted them from 6th to 3rd in the AP poll this week.

As for this past Saturday, another road win for OBC (Ol' Ball Coach) on the road (although against a not-so-good Arkansas team that's been struggling this year). South Carolina's now bowl eligible with that 6th win (2 more games to go), so no telling what the final tally will be yet. Just don't bet against 'em.

And don't bet against an improbable run by North Carolina's Tar Heels. For the second time in three weeks the 'Heels played a ranked opponent at home. First time they beat #23 Virginia 7-5. Last Saturday they managed another 2-point win over #19 Boston College. It really wasn't that close: 16-7 until BC scored with less than a minute left. We'll take it though. Next up, Maryland at Chapel Hill. The current "most crucial game in John Bunting's career". Win it and move to 5-4 with 2 games to go -- and one win away from bowl-eligible in a season the experts said would find Carolina lucky to win 2 or 3 games. Go 'Heels!!!!!

Then came Sunday. The Carolina Panthers wax Tampa Bay 34-14, a magnificent completion of a great weekend for "Carolina Football" -- three different ways!

It should also be said I was most pleased to see that old friend and former teammate Rod Broadway got two big presents on Saturday: his North Carolina Central Eagles won the CIAA title with a come-from-behind win over Bowie State, and in the process set a new school record, the first ever 10 win season at NCCU. Way to go, "Funky"! He's a great guy, a terrific coach, and a wonderful representative for his school.

A Tale of Two Coaches

2005-10-31T08:35:00.000-05:00

Coaching college football has to be one of the most difficult civilian jobs in terms of what you have to do to keep it and the material with which you're working. There are, and have been, a few men who have reached the pinnacle of success in the field, whose every decision has seemingly been "the right one". But the majority find every decision questioned. No matter the degree of success or failure, there's someone out there who a) thinks you're an incompetent boob, b) thinks the old alma mater screwed-up royally by hiring you, c) if you do have success you're incredibly "lucky", because of a and b, and d) swears he'll not send another dime to the school until you're gone. With supporters like that, who needs arch-rivals?

Last year until the last weekend in October, the word at UNC was John Bunting was going to be history by the end of the season.
Yeah, the word went, he's an old alum, he's a really great guy, but man we NEED a FOOTBALL COACH.

Rumor had it that some big wig alums were spotted on the golf course with "the Ol' Ball Coach" (Steve Spurrier) and "Visor Boy" was already checking out the available housing in Chapel Hill. That was the word until Bunting went and screwed that up by knocking-off #4 Miami 31-28 on Halloween weekend, turning around the season, saving his job, pointing the program "in the right direction" and bagging the schools BIGGEST WIN EVER. Not bad for someone "who's a nice guy, but can't coach".

Fast forward to this past weekend. Unlike last year, there's no real pressure on Bunting and the Heels as they travel to South Florida for the rematch with now #6 Miami. For the first half it's all UNC, as the D forces three interceptions and gets a safety when the ball is centered over the head of the Hurricane quarterback and gets out of the end zone. 16-7, Heels at the half. Could have been 23-7 if a wide open receiver catches a perfectly thrown pass. That last line has been a recurring theme this year. (That's one of the things that makes it a frustrating job. And remember, these are 18-22 year olds, not seasoned professionals!) Second half, different story. Miami's Larry Coker must have pulled out every stop in lighting a fire under the Canes, because the 2nd half was 27-0, Miami. Dreams of two in a row over Miami go up in flames. But then again, how many teams actually beat Miami in the Orange Bowl anyway? Precious few.

The cat calls on the message boards were getting crazy even during the game: Worst coach ever. What's wrong with the Heels? Can't they do anything right? And that was even in the first half! ENOUGH. 3-4 on the season with four games left is not the end of the road. Tough climb, yes. But not the end. After all, with the schedule UNC had this year, most EXPERTS said they'd be lucky to win 3 games. Already have that, could win as many as 7 if things fall into place down the stretch. Give the man a break. He DOES have the program moving in the right direction. Remember, even if he's 11-0 SOMEONE won't be happy with "the direction of the program". in the end, he'll do just fine.

As for "Visor Boy", what happened to him? Well you see, after UNC beat Miami last year, (so the story goes) Lou Holtz invited Spurrier for a round of golf at Augusta National. Told him he was going to retire at South Carolina at the end of the season. Supposedly said there was only one guy he'd want to see take his place. Deal made. So, you say, how's the "Ol' Ball Coach" doing these days? He's hasn't got the program where he wants it yet, but it's making progress. I can tell you our daughter is happy about it since he's coaching for her school. And she says she'll take 16-15 over Tennessee in Knoxville any day of the week. I think he'll be okay in his new job.

Pulled!

2005-10-27T12:11:00.000-04:00

Harriet Miers has asked the President to withdraw her name from consideration for SCOTUS. Conservatives are breathing again. The loud debate over her nomination was NOT a crackup on the right, despite the wishes of liberals -- it was merely a very loud disagreement.

Now maybe one of the "A-listers" will be the next nominee, and we can look forward to a blow-up on the left.

Where's the "U"?

2005-10-26T13:30:00.000-04:00

Hmmm? That's what a lot of college football viewers will probably be saying on Saturday when the North Carolina Tar Heels travel to Miami to play the Hurricanes. It's homecoming at U Miami, and in honor of that, the U has opted to use "throwback" uniforms for the game. They are replicas of the 1967 uniform worn by NFL Hall of Famer Ted Hendricks when he was a star linebacker at the U. Before the U logo came into being. Before the U was feared. The Miami throwback helmets are gold with replica hurricane flags on the sides and a green stripe down the middle. Not so intimidating.
Curious thing... Isn't the not only one of the most recognizable logos in college football, but a constant on-field reminder of Miami football glory (5 National Championships from 1983-2001)and dominance? You want to give that up, even for one game? For homecoming? Against North Carolina?

Miami quarterback Kyle Wright and offensive lineman Rashad Butler modeled the throwback uniforms recently for the media. Head Coach Larry Coker's assessment? "Damn sure better win. That's all I can say."

Maybe North Carolina can bring a little "throwback" of their own to Miami's homecoming -- say to a homecoming game at UNC -- October 30, 2004.

Better Late Than Never

2005-10-24T23:42:00.000-04:00

I see that Michelle Malkin was able to tear her attention away from Harriet Miers, Wilma and the P(F)lame Game to finally report something we noted here Friday evening. We updated that thanks to continued scratching on the part of many, including Jon Sanders at the John Locke Foundation, the higher-ups at NC State got around to officially condemning "Kamau the Exterminator's" racially inflammatory comments. Way to stay on top of the news, Michelle.

Deee-fense!

2005-10-22T22:04:00.000-04:00

Two weeks removed from a 69-14 pasting at the hands of Louisville, and the result is as different as night and day. Carolina's Tar Heels had to face the elusive Marques Hagans and Virginia. Judging by the teams' last games (UVa had upset Florida State last week, 26-21) and hearing the media sports gurus tell it looked as though it would shape up to be a long afternoon for the light blue. On the other hand, you had to wonder what the Vegas oddsmakers knew when the game was listed as a "pick-'em". Turns out they were right.

Final score in Beautiful Kenan Stadium, 7-5, Carolina. How about those Tar Heels, huh? Lowest score in a winning effort since John Bunting was a senior linebacker (1971) and the 'Heels stopped Wake Forest in the very same stadium, 7-3.

Well not much time to savor this one, as Miami is next up at the Orange Bowl next Saturday at 3:37pm (ABC). For the moment, both teams are tied for second place in the ACC Coastal Division at 2-1 behind Virginia Tech (4-0). Hopefully it will be another great contest like last year's 31-28 game. Right down to the wire.

Pic-o-the-Week

2005-10-21T09:56:00.000-04:00

Has to be former House Speaker (R, TX) Tom DeLay's mugshot photo:

Looks to me as though the caption should read: "Tommy DeLay, recently named President of the local Rotary Club."

[Picture source: Powerline]

Liberal Thinking and Higher Education

2005-10-20T12:29:00.000-04:00

"Former" NC State Visiting Professor (and I use the P word loosely) Kamau Kambon's speech last Friday at Howard University in Washington, DC, has many scratching their collective heads. For the record, Kambon proposed the extermination of white people. Because, of course you know among other things that white people are the scourge of the planet. This has long been a token "truth" among liberal intellectual elites: Columbus ruined the Western Hemisphere, bringing disease that killed indigenous peoples, etc., etc. Therefore it's only "reasonable" to expect that NC State University's pointy-heads would relish having someone with Kambon's intellectual take on things teaching its students.

Having taken a few courses in West Raleigh over 30 years ago, myself, I cannot fathom such. The climate apparently was much different then -- Textiles, Engineering, Agriculture, Architecture, Design and Computer Science -- those were among the most popular majors then. We'd never heard nor thought of such a major as "Africana Studies". My how times must have changed. Of course, "Women's Studies" and "African-American Studies" were not majors at UNC-Chapel Hill when I was a student here in the following few years, either.

I'm not so sure Kambon would have gotten away with such clearly inflamatory speech in the early to mid '70's, but what do I know? We were trying to get out of going to Vietnam, and looking for whatever it was that we would be happy doing for the next 40-50 years. We were too busy to try to figure out how to dispose of 87% of the American population.

Whoever thought Kambon had anything relevant to "teach" to NC State University students ought to be relieved of his or her tenure. Baring that, a public embarrassment would be in order. Maybe on State's Jumbotron at the next game at Carter-Finley with his/her picture and the caption "You're **$PO@#(&%) FIRED" underneath. And how about let's not give this "educator" any more input on future hirings of visiting professors, huh?

UPDATE (Fri, 10/21/05 at 8pm): According to Jon Sanders at The John Locke Foundation, the NC State Provost (Larry Nielsen) has released the following statement on Kambon's inflamatory speech:

"The remarks recently attributed to one of our former employees do not in any way represent the values and standards of the university. This type of speech is counter to any reasoned discussion on the issue of race relations, and is absolutely unacceptable in the NC State community."

Good. Now, as for whomever thought he'd be a good addition to the faculty "pool"... see above!

Permissive, Accepting Asheville

2005-10-19T15:34:00.000-04:00

What used to be known as "The Land of the Sky" will now be known by its newly approved slogan, "Any Way You Like It". Is it just me, or does that have a somewhat "adult" connotation to it? No doubt from here on out they'll also be borrowing from Las Vegas, "anything that happens in Asheville STAYS in Asheville".

Worst. Postulating. Ever.

2005-10-19T12:53:00.000-04:00

The left is losing it again. This time over their hypeful reportalizing* on the Fitzgerald investigation into which evil Republican operative mean-spiritingly outed Valerie Flame. It is becoming a literal orgy on the left, fanned by stories in The Washington Post and on US News.com.

As noted yesterday by National Review Online's, Byron York, there is a distinct excitement among those in the "reality-based" community. And the speculating is getting fierce. Check out the giddiness in this tome from Chris Matthews. While you're at it, check out this hyperventilated game of connect-the-dots by Matthews on MSNBC today. Not only does he continue to echo the DU/dKos/Deaniac left (albeit in a more polite choice of words) "Bush lied, people died", "Joe Wilson had the goods on WMD", "Cheney is making the decisions and telling Bush what to do", and on and on, he's reaching for straws. Unbelievable.

The left SO wants Bush and Cheney to be disgraced, thrown out of office and taken away in handcuffs and leg irons, that they'll do just about ANYTHING to make that happen. Including misreading the silence coming from the Fitzgerald investigation. No report coming equals indictments all the way to the top! Don't believe it? Read about it here in today's New York Times.

It will be really be hysterical if and when Fitzgerald actually says "there was no crime here". In the words of Bugs Bunny, "what a bunch of maroons!"

*Hypeful reportalizing = hyped-up wishful-thinking editorializing masquerading as "reporting" the facts.

UPDATE (Wed 10/19/05 at 11pm): Something I missed earlier (Sorry!) The Washington Post apparently noticed the huge excitement it had helped build on the left and properly noted it as a bit premature.

UPDATE 2 (Thurs 10/20/05 at 8:45pm): Great line in the first paragraph of this report on the Plame Affair from Investors Business Daily:

"Politics: As special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald's mandate expires, Karl Rove's only crime may be not that he 'outed' Valerie Plame as a CIA operative but that he exposed her husband, Ambassador Joe Wilson, as a liar."

Elitism on Parade

2005-10-19T10:05:00.000-04:00

There has been an ongoing debate at The Corner on National Review Online over the past several days about just what qualifies as proving someone is an elitist or not. Suffice it to say the funniest comment by far is here in this quick post by Kathryn Jean Lopez.

From my observations in this, one of the most liberal (and therefore elitist) hang-outs on the east coast (Chapel Hill), I'll go along with that. Probably 90 percent of the Kedwards ~~voters~~ supporters from '04 still are driving around with Kerry/Edwards stickers on their Volvos, Lexi and Priuses. Then again, there are an awful lot of W-04 stickers still on SUV's! I'd say the latter takes a lot more conviction than the former.

Supreme Rumblings

2005-10-19T08:28:00.000-04:00

Perhaps I was a bit premature when I postulated last week it might be time for the Bush Administration to throw in the towel on Harriet Miers. I'll admit to being more willing to see what happens than that post let on. The general tone was pretty hard on the President, as he probably deserved -- and has been getting from many on the right. But, I will say it came from having heard so much carping from usually thoughtful conservatives.

So, what's the story now? Well, it still may come to that, but I am willing to see what happens. I must admit it's still not looking all that good for Ms. Miers making it to the hearings -- note the tone of Judge Robert Bork's scathing editorial in the Wall Street Journal today (H/T:Captain's Quarters). However, some of the harsher critics on the right appear to be moderating a bit.

John Podhoretz has been a frequent critic of the Miers pick, but sounds a note of caution to those who place a lot of stock in the Bork viewpoint. The same could also be said for "The Great One" , who went out of his way yesterday to help explain the opposition.

Monotonous Misinformation

2005-10-19T08:06:00.000-04:00

It's getting pretty difficult to turn on the radio here in central North Carolina without hearing someone railing against those eeeeeevvvvviiiilllll BIG OIL companies. Just this morning Kevin Miller, morning host at Raleigh's WPTF, said -- for about the eight zillionth time -- the high gas prices in North Carolina can't be due to anything other than the "obscene profits" being made by BIG OIL, while allowing that maybe they're also due in part to the rediculous sliding scale state gas tax (referenced before in this blog).

As part of this morning's segment on high gas prices, Miller continued to extoll on the virtues of his "solution" to part of the problem -- the gas tax one: eliminate it one day a week or a month. Oh yeah, that would really work now, wouldn't it? Tell me you don't think if folks knew the gas prices were going to drop 27 cents on Monday (and then go back up Tuesday) there wouldn't be gas lines all over the place on Monday, maybe even people out late Sunday night or early Monday to beat the crowds. There would likely be some demand- caused shortages on Monday, too, which would lead to even higher prices on Tuesday than there otherwise would have been. In fact, you could expect gas prices to go up during the day Monday, since the artificially caused increases in demand would create upward pressure on the price at the pump. Don't believe me? Check out this earlier post here. If you'd rather seek assurances from an outside source, check here and here (the last one's just for fun).

[Thanks to George Leef for the link to the Lehman essay.]

A Pyrrhic Victory in the Offing?

2005-10-13T08:21:00.000-04:00

Where do we go from here? It's time to face the fact that Harriet Miers will not likely make it to the confirmation process in her short, but highly charged time as a Supreme Court nominee. Despite the reasoned calls from a number of people on the right (and even on the left) who are willing to see what happens at the confirmation hearings, the nomination is sunk. The majority of conservative pundits (from most of the National Review Online contributors to John Fund at the Wall Street Journal to Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh and on and on) are going to force the issue. Period.

There's just no way at this point either President Bush or Harriet Miers can pacify those whose pen and microphone have spoken and continue to speak so forcefully against her. In fact, any further delay from the inevitable will cause even more damage to the President and his ability to govern for the remainder of his term.

Rightly or wrongly, there is nothing whatsoever to be gained by continuing this battle. Whether or not Harriet Miers would prove to be a decent conservative justice is, at this point, totally irrelevant. Like it or not, there is only one way out: either President Bush or Harriet Miers must withdraw her name from consideration.

Given that inevitabiliy, some who have screamed the loudest will cheer in a perceived victory. But, there is no silver lining in this dark cloud. Reread that last sentence. What has happened over the last week and a half will leave its ugly mark on future Supreme Court nominations, most of all the immediate one.

Let's assume for a moment those rumors yesterday -- noted in this blog and elsewhere -- are true: that some of those "a-team" potential Supreme Court nominees did decide not to put themselves or their families through what looked to be a tough nomination battle. Let's further say it was two potential nominees who declined. With that and the fact the Miers nomination will be pulled due to the tantrum on the right, what then? How can any clear-thinking indidvidual believe any of the other "a-team" possibles would agree to be the next nominee?

Because of that, I think it is very likely the next nominee will also not be an "a-lister". And avoiding a Pyrrhic Victory for those who fought so hard to derail Miers is also highly unlikely. One can almost hear the words of King Pyrrhus today, "one more such victory and I am lost". I hope the "winners" will be able to handle the future. It's surely not going to be pretty.

Keeping Mum on the Strategy

2005-10-11T12:33:00.000-04:00

The biggest problem for the White House in the Miers fiasco has been the sharp stinging reaction it has received from so many supporters on the right. They expected a flurry of negative press and posts from the MSM and left wing blogosphere, but had no clue of the scope of the reaction they would receive from the conservative side. It has left the White House gasping at straws. Because they don't understand why the right doesn't "get it" here. It's the presumption that the base should just know and implicitly understand the reasoning without having it explained to them. We've seen it before. On too many occasions.

In the past it has seemed that whenever liberals have tossed rediculous accusations about (Republicans want to take away your Social Security check, put Grandma on the street, kill your babies, take away school lunches, make you drink dirty water and breathe dirty air, whatever the asinine claim), conservatives ALWAYS IGNORED the chatter and assumed the right and center would see through the hysteria. It sometimes bothered quite a few on the right that the Republicans didn't defend themselves more. Sometimes it was a miscalculation.

In this instance, you have to know the White House understands the stakes here are just as high or higher as any previous time. So why aren't they making a concerted effort to dispell any concerns coming from the right with concrete thoughtful answers? I submit they can't afford to.

It's like pulling the star player out of the game at a critical moment and having everyone question your motives before the next play. Coaches can't stop the game and explain why the commentators and fans "don't get it". They presume the decisions they make are the correct ones. Even if they take a bunch of flack for making them. In fact, if they did stop and explain, then the other team would know why it's happening and adjust accordingly. I submit it's similar here.

I've noted previously (and others have as well) nose counting in the Senate may well be the real reason for this nomination. For whatever reason, the President does not believe he could get one of the "superstar" conservative candidates through the Senate, and a lost vote on a Supreme Court nominee would be a crushing defeat for both the President AND the conservative movement. He also knows his Dad made a foolish pick with someone with whom he was unfamiliar, but came with high recommendations (Souter). He knows a repeat would be just as devastating.

So he picks someone he KNOWS and TRUSTS. Someone he knows so well he's certain of how she thinks and how she will perform in her new job. But he can't disclose all of this because Harry Reid and the rest of the Democrats on the Committee and in the Senate THINK Miers will be another O'Connor, and that suits them just fine. In fact, they know another O'Connor would be the best possible outcome for them given THIS President.

Only the President holds all the cards on this. He knows what they don't. He's sure of it. He knows Miers is the best possible choice because he can fool the other side into going along with him. But he had to know the base wouldn't like it initially. I submit was part of the calculation, because it would serve to encourage the left into being certain they're getting the best they could ever expect. The negative reaction from the base is much more vocal and sustained than the White House could have expected, but remember: they can't say WHY. Because they don't want to give away the play.

So we get the lamest excuses: "she broke the glass ceiling", "it's sexism", "it's elitism". Because they can't really say why -- until that unknown substitute player takes the "safe" off-tackle dive play and turns it into a 65 yard touchdown run. Then the coach is called a "genius". By the same people who called him an "idiot" moments before.

Does that help?

The Alternative Universe: A REALLY Scary Place

2005-10-11T08:22:00.000-04:00

Okay, so it's now been over a week since President Bush committed political suicide. I GET it, okay? He didn't want to keep being President, but couldn't stand seeing the brilliant intellectual John Effen Kerry win last November. Right? Makes sense, doesn't it? Yeah, that's got to be it. I mean, we know he just doesn't care about the future. That's why he gave us a new Chief Justice we didn't know much about until the hearings. He hates minorities. That's why he put Condie Rice in place of Colin Powell. Why we're stuck in the quagmire of ~~Viet Nam~~ Iraq. Why he was so slow to act before and after Katrina wiped out part of the Deep South. He lets Dick Cheney call all the shots, and Dick's been away for a while so he's had to make a few choices. That's why he tapped his two-bit lawyer friend from some third-rate law school to take O'Connor's swing-seat on the Supreme Court. Why he wants to ruin Social Security. Doesn't care about your kids' future. Hates old people. Wants Grandma to starve. Yeah, it all fits together. He's stupid. He wants the country to go into the dumper. He's a right wing nut case. What other "well-reasoned" garbage can we throw on President Bush's funeral pyre?

I have read plenty of just that sort of intellectual vapidity all over the internet in the last week. The shocking thing is I've only been repeating the sort of chatter I've been reading on the supposedly conservative web sites. Some coming from bloggers and political commentators, but most coming in the form of responses from the so-called "readers" of those websites. Most who claim to be conservative or moderate. All because of the nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court.

The meltdown is unlike anything I've ever seen before. It's like all of the dKos/DU/Michael Moore/Deaniac/Whacko-fringe-leftist rants have finally taken hold on the right. Therefore, it must be true: the left has won the intellectual war for the heart and soul of this country. Everyone hates Bush now. Or am I missing something here?

Just think where we'd be now if George W. Bush had not been reelected last November. I can tell you where: we'd be talking about President Kerry's pick for Chief Justice of the Supreme Court: Hillary Clinton. And even though she's probably even less qualified from the standpoint of all of those measures being applied to Harriet Miers, you know the left would be rallying around the next superstar to join the Supreme Court, and the media would be falling all over itself proclaiming her again as "the smartest woman in America -- if not the WORLD". No doubt. By the way, she'd be joining the court along with previously nominated and approved intellectual Laurence Tribe, who was tapped to fill the O'Connor seat when she announced her retirement. Yeah. Just think about that for a minute before you keep up the dumping on President Bush and Harriet Miers. Do you really think his choice is such a bad thing, now?

Ouch!

2005-10-10T23:56:00.000-04:00

I hadn't thought of this, but DJ Drummond's point does make you kind of queasy, doesn't it? Betsy Newmark is thinking along the same lines.

[H/T to Lorie Byrd at PoliPundit for the second gem!]

Cooper at the Bat

2005-10-10T15:22:00.000-04:00

Now that North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper is on the case, we can all breathe easier! He's out to round up those nasty price gougers in the oil business! Gas prices are sure to come down now, right? Yew betcha! Ol' Roy's gonna kick hiney. Problem is the hineys he should be kicking belong to the members of the Legislature and Governor.

"We're Number One! We're Number One!" At $3.04 a gallon for regular unleaded, North Carolina is #1 among the lower 48 states (second only to DC at $3.10 per, according to AAA. Why is that? Well, the state gasoline tax is above the national average now, where it didn't used to be. That's because part of the tax varies, thanks to the tax hungry Legislature and Governor. There is a base of 17.5 cents per gallon, plus that floating part of about 10 cents a gallon now (7% of the average wholesale price of gasoline for the previous 6 months). Governor Easley, unlike other Governors, says that won't change.

So, send your thanks to Mike Easley, c/o Governor's Mansion, Raleigh, NC. While you're at it thank your local legislator for the sliding scale which will insure North Carolina's gas taxes will rise even more in the future. While you're at it, let the AG know he ought to be looking in Raleigh for the real problem.

UPDATE (10/10/05 at 4:00pm) I see Chad Adams is also wondering about this in his post at The Locker Room.

Toll Roads and Other Alternatives

2005-10-10T08:30:00.000-04:00

I remember when I was a kid we made an occasional Summer trip to the northeast by car. Later, I vividly recall driving to Washington, Philadelphia and other northeastern points of interest for both work and for pleasure. Which brings to mind a commonality in those trips: toll roads.

The Richmond-Petersburg Turnpike is a vivid part of those memories. It was a regular dance of death, where every so often all the cars and trucks would have to slow down and zig-zag in an attempt to find the shortest lines through the toll booths. Then you'd toss a quarter or two or maybe a dime into the basket and wait for the "ding" and green light to come on before flooring it to zig-zag back into the traffic flow and the race to the next one. It was NASCAR with eight million cars on the track and mandatory pit-stops.

I think it used to cost something like a dollar and ten cents when I was a kid (there were five toll booths) if you were coming up I-85 to get through Richmond on I-95 northbound using that toll road. By the time I was an adult it was more like $2.25. That toll road began operating in 1958 and paid for itself and its upkeep long before the toll booths were completely removed in 1992. Even with the danger, it would have been worth many times that amount just because there was no decent alternative route. That first time I made the trip through Richmond WITHOUT a toll was a real treat -- I noticed it also cut down on travel time by a measurable amount.

Other toll roads were different, you'd get on and take a ticket similar to going into a parking deck and then pay the related toll at the booth on the exit where you got off. Now there are even toll roads that electronically monitor bar codes on your windshield and send you a bill. Progress. At a small cost for convenience.

If I had to put a dollar amount on toll road use when I was riding or driving, I'd guess my folks and I spent less than 200 dollars over the past 50 years, so you could say my toll road experience is not all that great. However, that doesn't mean I don't have an opinion. For the most part, they serve a useful purpose.

The vast majority of toll roads are built to make travel more convenient, while providing a way to justify funding the construction of expensive projects, since they pay for themselves over time. That was the exact reasoning behind the Richmond-Petersburg Turnpike.

Now we're hearing about some possible toll road projects here in "The Good Roads State" of North Carolina. In the right instances, they're probably a good idea since new roads cost a huge amount of money. Since it's a new idea here, let's take a closer look.

Just like anything state government finds itself taking-on for the first time, like a lottery, for instance, you can bet there's going to be some kind of operating "Commission" or "Authority". Some group of people who have no real clue about how to do that which they've now been tasked to do, and who'll be hamstrung by their enabling legislation, but who'll learn a lot about it in short order and probably do a fairly decent job of executing over time. Using the lottery example, if this is North Carolina, then the head of Toll Roads will probably be someone who used to be opposed to it, and there'll be something in the legislation to interfere with the accomplishment of the commission's goal!

Ha, ha, you say. But check this out... There now is a North Carolina Turnpike Authority! It's headed by a childhood friend of Governor Mike Easley (insert favorite cronyism joke here). Looking for the "opposition factor" here? Well, it's there, just not quite as blatant as the lottery Commission boss who used to be anti-lottery.

The Turnpike Boss, David Joyner, has transportation in his blood -- his daddy was a Highway Commissioner in the 1950's. In his heyday, pappa was quoted as saying, "we'll never have toll roads in this state as long as I can help it." At 135-grand a year, junior can afford to ignore senior's thoughts on the subject.

According to the Raleigh News and Observer -- that notoriously centrist (not) clarion of the capitol city -- the Authority is looking at as many as nine (count 'em) possible toll roads in the state. The first one may be right here under the nose of the Authority: an extension of the Durham Freeway which would be tolled for its four and a half mile length.

If you're thinking that four and a half mile road is most likely not a major priority in the highway system, you'd be right. That's why it hasn't been built yet. But it would make travel more convenient to quite a few people working in the Research Triangle Park. Letting them foot the bill for a road they'll use almost exclusively is not a bad idea. In fact, it's a good example of where this sort of idea would have merit.

BUT, you left out the monkey wrench in the enabling legislation, didn't you, you say? No, and here it is: in writing legislation to allow for toll roads, North Carolina lawmakers said there have to be free alternatives for every project. So, won't that will play into the cost they'll be able to charge for using the toll roads? Certainly.

Then given the choice between free and pay-as-you-go, what makes one think toll roads will pay for themselves in a reasonable amount of time? Hmmm? Well, just this: the cost to use them has to be reasonable in the mind of the consumer in terms of the time or distance saved, or the free alternative will be the route of choice. That's one of the main things the Authority will have to determine, and it's why I think toll roads will not just spring-up all over the place in North Carolina's future.

It's pretty hard not to see how that RTP project would probably fly even if the toll was relatively high -- it would beat the alternative by providing faster ingress and egress (a little trans-talk, there), but other projects may not be so well accepted. Again, that's what the Authority's for, right? Figuring these things out (as long as political favors are kept to a minimum) and planning such projects wisely: such as balancing whether or not to pay for convenience and determining whether or not a project will be environmentally "friendly" (that's very important to lots of folks around this area). Let me help on that last point -- cutting down on traffic jams is probably more helpful to the environment from a pollution standpoint than wasting time trying to figure out ways of cutting down on the number of cars on the road.

By the way, in the name of saving the planet, there's another transportation Authority in North Carolina that's proving its worthlessness while expending lots of energy trying to push a dead horse: the Triangle Transit Authority with its "Train Ride to Nowhere". Face it, when the feds don't even want to fund your boondoggle, it's time to cut your losses and move on.

Another thought on saving the environment in transportation: how about doing a better job timing the lights on busy roads, huh??? Needless stop and go traffic may be great as a "traffic calming device" and for "encouraging public transit use", but it's wasting an awful lot of our $3.00 a gallon gasoline. I submit for your approval the Durham-Chapel Hill Boulevard (otherwise known as US 15-501): Stop. Go. Stop. Go. Stop. Go. Ad infinitum. Thank goodness there are alternatives on either side that most people either don't know about or are too lazy to use. If they weren't available, I'd NEVER go to Durham.

And how about the laziness of leaving all the traffic signals in full traffic mode 24/7, instead of putting many of them (on those intersections where it would be safe to do so) into a blinking mode in the off hours (say 10pm to 5am). I understand Raleigh does this, and I know from living there Wilmington has done it since 1979. Those things save gas and therefore cut down on emissions, not to mention ease people's bloodpressure. Nothing is so aggravating as sitting through a two to three minute light sequence when there is absolutely no one using the cross street during the cycle!

Enough for now. Happy Monday!

Truth (or Fiction) and Consequences

2005-10-09T13:44:00.000-04:00

The event was bad enough: an earthquake that devastated portions of Pakistan, Afghanistan and India early yesterday. Claims of death tolls of 30-thousand or more are circulating in Kashmir alone, with upwards of 42-thousand reported injured in that region. In the old days my first thoughts on hearing that would have been, ..."that's terrible." But the reaction I have now when I hear such reports is, ..."really? How do they know that yet?" That's one fall-out from an out of control media here in the "good-old USA".

Just last month we heard first-hand stories of such gruesome behavior following Hurricane Katrina one might have imagined the devil himself had whipped those perpetrators into an out of control herd of animals. The often brutal descriptions were unlike anything most would have imagined in these United States. And we were told to get ready for a death toll in five figures when all was said and done. It turned out to be hysterical nonsense which had been given creedence simply on the basis of who it was passing those rumors on as facts. Elected officials and members of the news media were equally at fault for not "fact-checking" what they were presenting as truth. Now we know the feeding frenzy was just that -- an insane hunger for some kind of terrible news to report. We also know it was false and misleading.

So, how do we know we can believe the numbers coming out of Pakistan? Just because the local politicians and news media there say it's so? Hopefully, this too will turn out to be hyped-up. Unfortunately, their politicians and news media probably aren't operating with an eye on portraying their fellow citizens in the worst possible light. Meanwhile, I am hoping things turn out better for those affected by yesterday's earthquake than we've been hearing.

A Mile Wide and an Inch Deep

2005-10-08T08:22:00.000-04:00

A really amazing thing is taking place right before our eyes. The single nomination of a candidate to the Supreme Court is threatening to cause as much harm to the political right as the dKos/DU/Deaniac/Sheehan fringe is harming the political left in this country. Think about it -- one nomination. And she hasn't even had her week in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee!

Just eleven months ago, George W. Bush was re-elected with the largest number of votes ever for a winning Presidential candidate. Some of his biggest supporters then are his harshest critics now. A huge number of Bush voters in 2004 are now saying "you're on you own, W..." or, "...he's lost my support for good...". Support that a year ago no one would have guessed would turn out to be a mile wide and an inch deep.

So what did he do to deserve that kind of instant erosion of support? Did he commit a crime in office? No. Did he get caught diddling an intern? No. Did he lie? Cheat? Steal? Murder? No. No. No. No. His "crime" was submitting the name of one person for one particular vacancy on the Supreme Court. A name none of his "supporters" expected. Someone no one but he knew enough about to even form a rudimentary judgement, yet nonetheless, by the mention of her name caused those "supporters" to leave the reservation in droves. Woah! Who woulda thunk it?!!

I've been reading as many conservative pundits and bloggers as I could stomach over the past week. The "intellectual" reasoning of the vast majority of those "opposed" to the President's pick is amazing: mostly it has been just the same kind of emotional reaction usually found on the left! Finding any old excuse to use as a "reason" to support an emotional reaction. You've heard it from the left: "Bush lied, people died!" "He went to war for Halliburton!" "He'll overturn Roe v Wade!" On and on. Only this time it's from the right. "She's a second rate lawyer from a third rate law firm!" "Crony pick!" "He passed over plenty of GREAT candidates!" "How do we know how she'll vote on Roe v. Wade?" (Oops, sorry, that's their line -- isn't it?)

In reality all of that fuss boils down to "he didn't pick the one I wanted", or "how dare he choose someone 'we' don't think is qualified (or know)", or "just who does he think he is". Well, last time I looked, he was still the President of the United States. As such, HE gets to make those kind of choices, and not us. And once the choice is made, she's on her own.

Thank goodness President Bush doesn't govern by "polls" as his predecessor did, or he'd would have immediately reacted by withdrawing this nominee, then taken a poll, submitted another name, likely have had to withdraw that one because of a different set of "concerns", then taken another poll, etc., etc., etc. Is that what we want in a President? Absolutely not. Just think what that would do for the confidence of the American public, not to mention for that of those who wish us ill.

As for Roe v. Wade, since when did the right start acting like the left? The left wants to know how a potential judge views Roe, they have a litmus test for judges: if you're squishy on Roe, you're out. Abortion is the sacrament of the left (thanks, Rush). We criticize that in them. In fact, we scream it: "You can't ask how a judge will rule on a case that's likely to come before them!!!" Yet it's becoming clear in this week that overturning Roe is the sacrament of many on the right. It's an "unless you're with us, you're unworthy" sort of thing. How rediculous. And it's manifesting itself in the current "battle" over the Supreme Court.

Quite frankly, we don't know how ANY of the possible nominees would rule on Roe should it be reconsidered by the court. We can only suspect. But how does that suspicion disqualify any person who is otherwise qualified. I know: let's just go with "gut feel" from now on. No other requirement.

What most of the dissenters are actually saying (without coming out and saying it) is "we can't afford to take a chance on how she might vote". That's a sneaky way of saying just what the leftists were saying about Chief Justice Roberts, "we need to know how he stands on Civil Rights, women's rights and privacy rights". The only difference is the answer preference in the mind of the person making that demand.

I am NOT willing to "throw the baby out with the bath water" -- and pitch a selfish hissy-fit just because things out of my control didn't go my way. I freely admit I don't know anything in reality about Harriet Miers, either -- except for the few facts about her biographical history. What I do know is this: I want to know more, but I refuse to let others' uninformed opinions affect mine. I want to see her interaction and interplay when she appears before the Committee. Until then I'll hold my decision on whether or not she's a good pick.

I have followed Presidential politics as long as I can remember. I can vividly remember having a "Goldwater in '64" campaign button when I was in the 4th grade. I remember hearing hysterical reactions of people on the left then saying "Goldwater will kill us all!" and such. I also remember celebrating quietly with some of my friends in Junior High when Nixon won in '68. That was the beginning of what led us to where we are today politically. Nixon was not a conservative, but he was preferable to the liberal Democrat Hubert Humphrey. Those days did begat the change in climate that eventually led to Reagan in '80, though, so that was good, was it not?

What I'm getting at is that the political climate has changed over time to something I prefer. It's by no means perfect, but it has come -- and will continue if we let it -- in a series of small steps, with just a few (Reagan in '80, the '94 mid-term elections) huge ones. Yes, there have been a few steps back, along the way but progress has been made and remains. Maybe this is a bump in the road or a possible step back, but WE DON'T KNOW THAT YET. So, let's not act like little children. The left does that well enough for everyone. Besides, someone has to be the grown up.

Shhhhhhhh! You're Starting to Act Like THEM!

2005-10-06T09:32:00.000-04:00

Three days is long enough. Too long, if you ask me. The gnashing of teeth, the whining, the feigned hurt -- "he DISSED us!", and all this rending of conservative cloth has got to STOP!!!! Yes, if you're a rock-ribbed conservative, you've got every reason to wonder why President Bush chose to tap Harriet Miers to fill Sandra Day O'Connor's slot on the Supreme Court. I understand his response to your questions and worry are not satisfying. BUT -- just as "we" don't know much of anything about Miers (except what others who don't know much about her are saying), doesn't she deserve some modicum of respect? I mean to hear some folks rant (George Will comes to mind), this woman is some boob from the back woods of Texas who "ain't got the sense God gave a caterpillar". STOP IT!!!!!

All of this over-the-top carping does only ONE thing: makes normally reasoned conservatives look about as rational as the dKOS/DU/Deaniac left fringe. I've had enough of the carping. When Ms. Miers is testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee during her hearings, THEN we will know more about her. We will (hopefully) get a better read on her thinking and her intellect. If she doesn't "measure up" to the questioning and probing, she won't be approved. Until then, let's face it: we just don't know. Period. So SHUT UP, and quit acting like my 5 year old who just got out-done by his 7 year old brother. "It's not fair!!! he tricked me!!! Wahhhhhhh!!!!"

And one other thing. Ms. Miers (I WILL give her the respect she's due) deserves to be treated as an adult, at the bare minimum. So does President Bush. Even if you disagree with him, he's still the President. He didn't have an affair with an intern in the Oval Office. He didn't turn the White House into some home of covert activity. All he did was nominate someone other than your preferred choice to the Supreme Court. So let's settle down, and remember there are quite a few folks out there who want to see you DEAD. I think that's a much more pressing concern.

Report-alizing Again

2005-10-06T09:00:00.000-04:00

When I studied electronic journalism in college -- eons ago, before realizing a Business Management degree would have more practical applicability in the real world -- we learned reporting and editorializing are two distincly different things. Obviously they don't teach that anymore in J-school, since we see examples all the time in the MSM of freely combining the two and attempting to pass off editorializing as honest "reporting". Here's an example from this morning's 8am (Eastern) AP Radio News with John Belmont:

"...The President's speech, according to insiders, is not being given just to pump-up support for the unpopular Iraq War..." [emphasis mine]

Where to begin? First of all this activity in Iraq is NOT the "Iraq War". That ended in 2003 when the Iraqui military was vanquished, and if I'm not mistaken, was not considered "unpopular" by any stretch. What's going on in Iraq now, AP, is the continuation of the GWOT! It seems AP didn't get the message that Iraq is on OUR side. I mean it's not like we're still fighting against Iraq's government or anything.

Typical of the AP to hook the modifier "unpopular" to "Iraq War". (it's VIETNAM!!!!) Just like they always add "right-wing" to anyone who's mainstream conservative (ie: "Right Wing Talk Show Host Rush Limbaugh").

Politics as usual. Sickening, too.

Moosemuss!

2005-10-05T19:08:00.000-04:00

Funny how sometimes something you just can't quite put a finger on, but instinctively feel, becomes instantly clear in the naked light of day. I spent most of my idle time (and granted that was not much) the past two days trying to make sense of the Miers' nomination. My first reactions can be seen here and here. I must say that snarky comment on "whomever has kidnapped President Bush..." was probably the best part of that insta-reax.

I'll admit I was underwhelmed, but the more I thought about it, the more I truly felt there must be some deeper strategy at work here -- and most definitely NOT a sacrificial lamb kind of strategy. But I just couldn't quite put my finger nor my thoughts on it. BAM! All of a sudden, Major Mike has identified it. "It" goes by the acronym of "Moosemuss". An excerpt:

"I don’t buy the theory that in an instant, the President, who incidentally, got the GWOT right, and the John Roberts nomination right. Who has Dick Cheney as his VP and Condi Rice as his SOS…blew a gasket and has gotten this completely wrong. I thought…maybe …MOOSEMUSS...the easily learned acronym that highlights the nine, generally accepted, Principles of War...I suggest that avoiding a battle here, and out maneuvering the Dems, will cause them more problems than Harriet Miers will ever cause conservative Republicans." Read it all.

H/T to Hugh Hewitt for the heads-up on Major Mike's brilliant piece.

A Dell of a Deal

2005-10-05T08:10:00.000-04:00

Dell Computer's largest assembly plant opens today in Forsyth County. Congratulations to the company, its new employees and the region on this landmark occasion. All was not sweetness and light, in getting to this event, however.

Just eleven months ago Dell announced it would locate in the Piedmont Triad of North Carolina, but it was uncertain just where in the Triad the computer giant would actually locate its assembly plant. Guilford, Davison and Forsyth Counties worked hard to get their recruiting "a-games" going. Each tried their best to come up with the most attractive combination of tax incentives, locations and give-backs to win Dell's eye. It may have been just another day at the office in the industrial recruiting game, but the process angered many folks in the state. Those folks argued the state's overly generous incentives package (worth over $240-million to Dell in a twenty year period, including $225 million in tax credits plus a $14.1 million job development grant and job training assistance from the state) amounted to corporate welfare at best, and bribery at the very least.

Forsyth County was eventually able to out-incentive its Triad brothers and win the contest, if, as some might say, you can call "giving away the store" a "win". The county will be granting Dell an additional $32 million in incentives.

Granted, in the world of economic development, there are plenty of positives to help offset the cost of incentive packages. Just the fact a top shelf company is located in your community is alone worth a huge amount -- it will be seen as a major reason for other companies to locate there, which will bring more jobs and more growth and development to the community.

Be that as it may, the cost to the taxpayers of encouraging Dell to locate in the Triad works out to well over $200,000 per job created. When the vast majority of those new jobs are said to be in the 26-28k per year category, the taxpayers of the state and of Forsyth County will essentially be paying those workers for seven years. Not a bad deal for Dell, at all. Let's hope the major investment by North Carolina and Forsyth County in Dell will be proven to be a smart one.

Affordability, Revisited

2005-10-04T10:54:00.000-04:00

Thanks to Jon Ham over at The John Locke Foundation's blog, "The Locker Room" for the link to my posting on "Affordable Housing" in Orange County (NC). His reference to Cole's comment on Durham is right on the mark! The comments on "self-inflicted wounds" are so true. Unfortunately, Chapel Hill's world class medical facilities can't help with THOSE wounds.

Just so you have an idea about the tax situation he references:

According the the Department of Revenue, the tax rate per $100 property value is lower in the unincorporated areas of Durham County (between $0.86 and $0.92, depending on the fire district) than in Orange County ($0.87 to $1.22, depending on fire and school districts), but the biggest variation is in the cities/towns.

If you must live in a municipality in Orange or Durham Counties, be aware Carrboro is the most expensive ($1.65), the portions of Chapel Hill in Orange County ($1.55) are next, followed by Hillsborough ($1.46), Durham City limits in Orange County ($1.43), Durham City limits in Durham County ($1.39), and Chapel Hill Town limits in Durham County ($1.33). Unfortunately there is not very much of the latter portion!

Once again: If the politicians in Orange County are looking to find available "reasonably priced" land for "affordable housing" they'd better start looking in the unincorporated areas of Durham County.

Hokie Myths

2005-10-03T08:47:00.000-04:00

I have to admit up-front I dislike inappropriate comparisons. Especially ones that may sound good on the surface but are seriously flawed when given any serious attention.

If you paid attention to some of the sportscasters and sportswriters in this area of the country recently, you’d think Virginia Tech didn’t play very good football before Frank Beamer set foot on the Blacksburg campus. If you believed that, you're mistaken. Those sportswriters and sportscasters are flat-out wrong.

With all of the talk in this area last week about NC State and North Carolina -- which program is in better shape for the future, and which head coach is better suited to the task -- comparisons to Frank Beamer and Tech were being thrown about. Most of them quite carelessly, I might add.

Usually the comments went like this, “how often does a coach come in and completely change the direction of the program? Frank Beamer came in and really turned-around the Virginia Tech program and they’re a national contender now”. Or, “just like Florida State, Virginia Tech wasn’t anything until Frank Beamer got them turned around.” Hmmm. Florida State had some limited success before Bowden, and he certainly DID change things markedly in Tallahassee, no question. But Tech, pre-Beamer, wasn’t anywhere near the football black hole that FSU was, pre-Bowden. Has anybody ever heard of Jerry Claiborne? How about Bill Dooley? Obviously a few sports "experts" hadn't.

Claiborne coached the Hokies from 1961-1970 (61-39-2, 2 bowl appearances) and Dooley coached Tech from 1978-1986 (64-37-1, 3 bowl appearances). Claiborne jumped from Blacksburg to the University of Maryland to try to turn-around sagging Terrapin fortunes. He did, too – 10 years, 3 ACC Championships, 7 Bowl appearances, 77-37-3 record. No slouch, Claiborne. Bill Dooley had turned-around UNC’s program (69-53-2, 3 ACC Championships and 6 Bowl appearances in 11 years) before he took over at Blacksburg in 1978.

When you look at the number of bowl appearances for Virginia Tech, you should note it was a member of the Southern Conference until 1964 (1st 4 years of Claiborne’s era) and then was an independent through the entire Dooley era, and into early Beamer. It joined the Big East in 1991. So, the possibility of making a bowl appearance was not nearly as easy for Tech then -- there were far fewer bowl games to go around in the early days, and Tech had no conference tie-ins, nor championships from 1965 to 1991 which would have put the Hokies in a possible “automatic” bowl berth.

True, Tech was NOT so hot between Claiborne and Dooley, when Charlie Coffey and Jimmy Sharpe combined for a 33-44-2 record. But Coffey did go 6-4-1 in 1972, while Sharpe went 8-3 in 1976 and 6-5 in 1977, so there were some winning seasons in that rough period.

As for coaching records, Bill Dooley’s .632 winning percentage in 9 years at Blacksburg looks suspiciously like Beamer’s 18 year tally of .636. Claiborne was not too far back of either of them at .608. It’s also interesting to note that it took Beamer 7 years before he would field a consistent winner: his 5 year mark was just 22-32-1; and it took him 9 years before he moved his career record at Tech to better than .500 (51-49-2). That’s giving the man a lot of rope. Something most coaches don’t get nowadays.

The point is none of that can take away from Beamer’s status as a top college coach right now. The Hokies ARE a national contender -- now. However, it’s also pretty lazy to paint the past with such a broad brush. In reality, Tech wasn't a football black hole before Beamer, and therefore does not qualify as a from-nowhere-to-the-top story. Not in the least.

Bush's Brain

2005-10-03T08:21:00.000-04:00

...is missing, no doubt.

UPDATE: (Monday 10/3/05 at 12:03pm) At least in the minds of many on the right. Such as: John Podhoretz, Rich Lowry and Ramesh Ponnuru

The Ultimate Stealth Candidate, UGH!

2005-10-03T08:04:00.000-04:00

So President Bush has nominated Harriet Miers to replace Sandra Day O'Connor on the Supreme Court. If he wanted to nominate someone who'd be considered a political crony, he might as well have nominated AGAG. The cat-calls about "cronyism" will continue -- especially since that's been such a hot topic after the FEMA/Brown debacle. You're on your own on this one, George. Don't expect the blogosphere to help you fend off criticism or pump up the base. They think you flat out blew it with this choice. Regardless of whether or not Miers is qualified (ahem!), to leave an outstanding list of proven jurists standing on the sidelines and to appoint a political ~~hack~~ crony with NO experience even dealing with the Supreme Court is a major mystery. Unless the plan is to throw her to the wolves. Then come back with the one you really wanted on second go around after HM gets eaten alive in the Senate. Meanwhile, it's gonna be GWB against BOTH the left AND the unsatisified Conservative mainstream.

Just where is the Scalia/Thomas model at work here? I'm sure I'm not the ONLY baffled blogger on the block.

To whomever kidnapped President Bush and replaced him with the droid we heard announce Miers' nomination: Okay, you've had your fun. Now give us back the GWB we know you've taken from us.

UPDATE: (Monday, 10/3/05 at 12:55pm) Okay, in case you're thinking I am a real moron... it is possible, I'll admit... I was working on the Virginia Tech post (above) when the Prez made his announcement on Miers, so I went with my gut feel at the time on this post. Now with time for a little reflection, I'll admit maybe I was a bit harsh. We DON'T know Miers as the President does. It's likely he knows a LOT more than we do about her and the Constitution. Let's hope so. But he has to know the Conservative wing of the party is not taking this well at all. Regardless of your personal thoughts, I'd bet Republican Congressmen and women are glad this isn't October 2006!

Affordable Housing? Dream On

2005-09-30T14:39:00.000-04:00

Orange County governmental bodies meeting earlier this week continued their on again, off again discussion of needing to do more about something called "affordable housing". Memo to local politicians: ain't no such thing in Orange County. True, over the past several years more than 400 permits for "size-limited units" have been issued in the county, and over 175 have been constructed.

Developmental fees instituted by municipalities and the county, borne by the developer and passed on to the home buyer are one facet to high housing costs. Another is lack of suitable land in convenient locations -- at a "reasonable" price. Yet another problem is high property taxes, the gift to government by the property owner that keeps on giving. But that's another topic for another day!

Some elected local leaders questioned the amount those pre-construction procedures and associated developmental fees could be both streamlined or lessened. No consensus was reached, although you can be sure the discussions will continue.

Well, if the goal is "affordable" housing, maybe Orange County and its municipalities might want to work out a deal with Durham County. Especially given this article which notes: "[s]ince last year, Orange County home values have increased five times more than home values in Wake and Durham counties," and this: "[t]he average resale price for a house in Orange County is now $443,680, up nearly $80,000 from 2004".

Hail to the Chief (Justice)!

2005-09-29T12:48:00.000-04:00

John G. Roberts, jr. was confirmed by the Senate earlier today by a 78-22 vote. Congratulations to the new Chief Justice.

Who Will It Be?

2005-09-29T00:04:00.000-04:00

You can take a test and find out which potential nominee to the Supreme Court best fits your liking.

Here's mine:

JUDGE EDITH HOLLAN JONES
U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Appointed by President Reagan.
Born 1949. A Texan.
Nearly nominated to Souter's seat by
President George H.W. Bush.

New World Man presents: My favorite candidate for the Supreme Court
brought to you by Quizilla

Take the test yourself!

I find it mildly interesting that my test result matches my original published thought on this -- I had commented on Jones previously in this blog. The more I think of it, though, the more I'd like to see something totally out of right field. Say former Tennessee Senator Fred Dalton Thompson. [Don't laugh, who'd have thought Dick Cheney for VP when he was leading the search committee? Just noting that Thompson guided John Roberts through the confirmation process! Not that that's any clue.] Don't you know the Hysteriacrats and the Main Steam Liberal Media would spontaneously combust over that!

Thanks to New World Man for the link.

Turning the Corner?

2005-09-26T19:43:00.000-04:00

59 minutes and 52 seconds had elapsed. Time for one last play. It all came down to the defense -- eleven men needed to keep the other eleven out of the end zone. Period.

Two years ago, in a game that featured a similar finish, the North Carolina Tar Heel defense could not protect the lead on the game's final play. Saturday, with one play to go, Carolina again held the lead and the opponent had the ball with one last chance. Different outcome this time.

Rewind the tape to the Arizona State game in 2003. Carolina held a four point lead at home going into the game's final play. ASU's Andrew Walter was under center. 42,000 Tar Heel fans were standing as one and chanting, "DEE-fense... DEE-fense"! The ball was snapped. Walter dropped back. The crowd roared louder, The rush was coming. Walter dodged the first wave. Time expired. The defense was almost on him again. Briefly, Walter spied an open receiver and let it fly. Time seemed to stand still. Suddenly, the silence told it all. The only sound was a cheer erupting from the impossibly small number of Arizona State faithful in the far northeast corner of the stands. Touchdown!!! Dagger in the hearts of Tar Heel players, coaches and followers. The scoreboard blinked the bad news: Sun Devils 33, Tar Heels 31. It was midway into the season, but the loss set the tone for the stretch run and a final record of 2-10. It was tough being a Tar Heel in 2003.

Fast forward to Saturday, where underdog North Carolina is leading NC State's Wolfpack in Raleigh with but eight ticks left on the clock. Time for one more play. State's Jay Davis is under center on the Carolina 40 yard line. Everyone in the house knows he'll be putting it up for the end zone. At least 52,000 of the 57,100 in attendance are urging the 'Pack to "GO"!!! The ball is snapped. Twenty-two men move at once. Davis rolls to the right to buy time. Carolina has a three man rush coming and everyone else is dropping deep into coverage. Seconds tick off. The ball is in flight. Time again stands still. Defenders and receivers converge. Again, the silence tells it all. The ball falls to the ground. This time it's the Carolina fans whooping it up in the distance. The scoreboard reports the final score: Carolina 31, State 24. Big difference in just two years? Maybe. Certainly it's more proof the UNC defense is on firmer ground. Second heart-stopping win over NC State in the last twelve months.

Last October, the UNC defense preserved a 30-24 victory on two of that game's final three plays. On second and goal from the three, State's T.A. McClendon appeared to have scored, but it was ruled his knee touched the ground first. On the next play, McClendon leaped over the pile, but was met head-on by Kalif Mitchell, who knocked the ball loose. Fumble. Recovered by Carolina. Threat denied. Carolina took a knee on the last play to secure the win.

Has the Carolina defense managed to "turn the corner"? Is it markedly better? So far three games into the season it's ranked 50th over-all in Division I. Last year's defense finished ranked 109th. There's too much football left to say for sure, but another big step can be made Saturday.

Just like last year, Utah is Carolina's next opponent. It seemed as if the Tar Heel defense forgot to make the trip to Salt Lake City then, as the Utes were virtually unstoppable in rolling up 669 yards of offense and 46 points en-route to a 30 point win. Granted, Utah doesn't have Alex Smith at quarterback nor Urban Meyer coaching it anymore, but they're still running Meyer's offense -- and they still have a bunch of talented players from last year's team. If Carolina's defense plays the way it has so far this season, and the offense continues to improve as it has, a Tar Heel win is not outside the realm of possibility. We'll know more around 5:00 Saturday afternoon. Until then, let's not take anything for granted.

Never Too Old To Learn Something

2005-09-22T07:56:00.000-04:00

What do Donald Trump and Bill O'Reilly have in common? Arrogance, I'll grant you, even pomposity. But if you watched The O'Reilly Factor last night, you know they both are in total agreement that Big Oil is ripping us off. If you missed it, here's Bill's Talking Points.

So he wants to know the name of the individual who sets the price for the gas you pay. Hmmm. How simplistic is that? The claim is that some single individual is responsible for calling every retailer and telling them what to charge for their gas. Now that really required a lot of thought. I think my 5 year old could probably do better than that. But just to be sure, I ought to go ask him and see what he thinks. Hold on...

Back now. Here's how that went:

Me: "Who do you think is responsible for telling gas station owners what they should charge for gas?"
5 year old: "The President?"
Me: "Do you think he sits down every day and calls all of the gas station owners in the United States and tells them what to charge?"
5 year old: "Maybe."
Me: "How long do you think that would take?"
5 year old: "Forever."
Me: "Right."
7 year old brother: "Dad, maybe the owners decide."
Me: "How would that work?"
7 year old: "I guess like a yard sale."
Me: "What do you mean?"
7 year old: "You know, if no one wants to pay five dollars for something, you say 'okay, how about three bucks, or whatever'."
Me: "Good point."
5 year old: "Let's sell some of our old toys so we can buy some new ones."
Me: "I like your thinking."

So the youth of America (at least in my house) doesn't buy the idea of one single person setting all of the oil prices, yet Bill O'Reilly does. Hmmm. What's up here?

O'Reilly says he called an oil "expert" and was told "...for gas to cost $3.00 a gallon, crude prices would have to be $95.00 a barrel". So he has decided that means we're being ripped-off. He also says "don't tell me 'the marketplace' or 'the market' is setting the price..." He, and later Donald Trump (obviously another of the nation's top oil experts), talked about how the oil companies are "making obscene profits". O'Reilly urged viewers to "conserve, conserve, conserve", and "don't drive on Sundays" to "send a message to the oil companies". Riiiiggggghhhhhttttt! I guess that means O'Reilly either walks to church or just plain doesn't go -- I'm guessing the latter. Not to mention that's an extreme over simplification with significant consequences -- it would impact a whole lot more than just oil companies.

He's obviously got a bone to pick with restaurants, retailers and the NFL with his "boycott" idea. Honestly, I didn't know he was so mad at so many people, did you? How does he think we get the goods and services we buy on Sunday? They just appear out of mid-air? Hey, Bill, a lot of your fellow Americans WORK on Sunday, in case you hadn't noticed. It's called "helping to make ends meet". Surely you can't fault someone for trying to make a living, can you?

And as for Trump -- who makes his money in real estate development --for him to jump on big oil is just too rich! Pot calling the kettle black sort of thing, I'd say. Yep, now there's an industry that plays the profit thing fairly, isn't it. Real Estate. Hey, Donald, who sets the price of housing? To paraphrase Bill, it must be one person. Right? Right? Don't tell me it's "the market" or "the marketplace". And why is selling a home you paid $75,000 for 20 years ago at $350,000 today not called an "obscene profit"? In stead, it's called "a smart investment". Why is that? Hmm?

I welcome your thoughts.

Econ 101 Revisited

2005-09-21T07:52:00.000-04:00

I hate to do this again, since it has already been addressed on this site here, here,and here, but I keep hearing politicians, people in the media, and folks in the general public who don't have a clue, so here goes...

People, let's put down the tinfoil hats and get off the soap boxes, here. Ignorance is bliss, they say, but it is also THE driving force behind the politicians' and the media's insistence in "doing something about 'price gouging' at the pump". RELAX. Take a DEEP breath.

Once again, an understanding of how the marketplace works is sorely lacking -- they don't teach economics at "Ed Co." (public school), so it shouldn't be a real shock so many don't "get it". Add to that certain well-meaning (but economically illiterate) politicians who are looking to score points with the consumer for "coming to the rescue" against the "greedy, price-gouging oil companies", and you have a recipe for misinformation and misplaced anger.

Let's try to understand a bit more about this commodity called gasoline. Most of this is understood, but let's review, anyway: First of all, it begins as crude oil, which is located deep below the ground in places like Utah, Colorado, the Gulf of Mexico, Alaska, the East and West Coasts of the US, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia, and on and on... It must be tapped by drilling, then pumped or shipped to a refinery where it can be separated into useable products, like gasoline or diesel fuel, heating oil (same as diesel fuel for the most part) and various other items. Secondly, it does not belong to you, YET. You don't have a right to gasoline at the price YOU think is "fair". The price of gasoline, like any other product, is set in the marketplace by the interaction of two forces: the availability of a product and the desire to acquire the product by those who want or need it. Supply and demand. Let's look at each factor, shall we?

As for supply... after it's acquired as crude, shipped to the refinery and processed, the gasoline (or other product) has to be shipped or pumped via a pipeline to a distributor who then pumps or delivers it to a wholesaler or retailer, who finally sells it to the consumer. That's a fair number of steps in the process. Any interruption at any point will cause the wholesale or retail supply to drop. When the supply drops, the price must rise.

Why is that, you say? Well, because the demand for the product is still unchanged. In simple terms, we still want the same amount, but the available product has suddenly become relatively scarce.

Why do you think diamonds cost so much? It's not because they're rare. In reality there is plenty of raw material to be mined. But because the Diamond mines and the supply chain up to the wholesaler and retailer are owned by the Diamond Cartel, it controls not only the available supply but the price for the most part. The supply of the "bling" in the marketplace is intentionally kept very limited by the Cartel, thereby making it artificially scarce and therefore, expensive.

Because diamonds are kept in short supply, the price of those that are available will be as high as: a) the seller can set, yet still be able to sell enough to maximize his profits, but b) not so high the consumer will not buy any. That same equation works anytime any particular product is in short supply. Like gasoline, recently.

Most politicians, in essence, are making the mistake of equating the current supply fluctuations in gasoline with an artificially manipulated supply -- such as is the case with diamonds. Understandibly, they're making an incorrect conclusion. It's not really a matter of "price gouging" at all, but rather one of gasoline's relative scarcity. We're talking apples and oranges, here.

Let's look at the effect of changing demand on price. Back in the Summer even before Katrina, the price of gas was going up. Not because of any hanky-panky by BIG OIL, but because it ALWAYS goes up in the Summer. Why? There are two big factors. The first is people want to go more places and do more things, and they want more gasoline so they can do it. Quite simply, the demand increases. Secondly, the refiners have a limited capacity -- there are not any refineries sitting idle that can be brought on line -- yet the EPA reqires a laundry list of different "blends" of fuel for different areas, which are aimed at reducing (somewhat) Summertime pollution. In this case, there is the same quantity coming out of the refineries, but more different products are being made. That means the amount of product going to any given place is constrained.

It's easy to see how the demand for some of the blends may become disproportionately high. For example, let's say the demand in California goes up significantly more than is anticipated by the refiners and retailers. In the winter (when there are far fewer different blends reqired), additional supplies of finished product may be re-routed to the west coast -- which could help satisfy the additional demand. But in the Summer, the distributor cannot send North Dakota gas out to the west coast because the North Dakota blend is different. The additional demand cannot be met easily, so the available supply becomes relatively scarce, and the price goes up.

Don't forget the fact the price of crude oil has almost doubled over the past year. That means regardless of other factors, the price of the finished product would be more now than it was in the past.

There's one more contributing factor this year -- the weather. Add in the fact Katrina caused a significant, although temporary (thankfully), disruption in the distribution of gasoline from the Gulf of Mexico region of the US. It also shut down a significant portion of production, temporarily. So what do you think that should mean? Good for you, if you said "the price would be expected to go up significantly".

Gasoline (in any blend) became relatively scarce three weeks ago (some Governors were even warning that their states "could run out of gas" in the aftermath of Katrina). With a scarce product, the price HAS to go up. If not, 1) the supplier will run out of the product and won't be able to meet any demand, and 2) people will want to "stock up" to weather the coming "shortage".

One good thing about higher prices is that they discourage stockpiling. That means some supply should be available at some price. Rising prices also encourage conservation. Because people know they only have so much money to spend on gasoline, they understand they need to make what they do have go farther. This is the marketplace at work.

Once the pipelines were back up and refineries moved production back on line, the prices DID start to come back down, didn't they? That's because the supply increased relative to the demand for it. People wanted x amount, but there was now more than x quantity available. In order to sell the supply on hand, a retailer or wholesaler had to lower the price to encourage consumers to buy from him (or her).

New development: Hurricane Rita is in the Gulf of Mexico, so guess what? The distinct possibility exists that supplies will be disrupted again, and in anticipation of that, the price has stopped going down -- temporarily. Wholesalers and retailers realize they'll probably have to pay more next week to get the needed supply since it could very well be limited. You should expect the price you pay will be going up because of that.

BOTTOM LINE: There may be SOME "price gouging" going on in limited instances, but the reality is the marketplace works to match demand with the available supply through price. If a particular retailer is truly "gouging" his customers, chances are they'll soon find out the guy down the street is selling gas for much less, and go there. In that case, if the "gouger" wants to sell anywhere near the normal amount of his gas, he'll have to lower the price. Remember, a full supply of $4 a gallon gas you can't sell is not worth having. What to do? Lower the price to the point people WILL buy it. End of "gouging", pure and simple -- and without Gov Co's interference.

STILL DON'T BELIEVE ME? Check out this, and this by Thomas Sowell, or this, and this by Walter E. Williams, or this by Jeff Jacoby, which leads into:

WHAT TO DO ABOUT THOSE HIGH PRICES: Not much, except conserve where you can and shop around for the best price available. In the long run, though, tell your politicians to put pressure on the EPA to limit the number of different summer blends they require. Also, push your legislators to make it less difficult to increase refining capacity. No new refineries have been built in the US in the past 25 years, due to government environmental restrictions and such. In essence, it has been easier to expand an existing refinery than build a new one. But many plants have reached the limit they can expand on their existing property, so expansion is not necessarily an option. Finally, tell them it needs to be easier to extract oil domestically (far too many people have pushed the politicians to keep oil wells away from places where crude oil is obatainable. There has been significant opposition to new drilling based on misplaced environmental concerns, as well. The oil is there, but compromises must be made to get it. That would go a long way toward neutralizing OPEC's grip on us.

So don't buy into this notion of "price gouging". What you're seeing is the marketplace in action. You may not like it, but that's what it is. If you think retailer A is selling gas for too much, shop around. Find a better price. Go there, instead. It's called "making a choice with your feet". And tell your Congressman or Congresswoman to work on the REAL problems, rather than the perceived ones.

9/21/89 Remembered

2005-09-21T00:01:00.000-04:00

The first line of Earth, Wind and Fire's 1979 hit "September" is: "Do you remember the 21st of September..." If you lived in the Carolinas in 1989 from Charleston through Columbia, to Charlotte and on up to the Virginia line, Hugo is a name you'll never forget.

The eye wall hit the South Carolina Coast just northeast of Charleston sometime before midnight on the 21st. Fortunately, it struck at LOW tide. The 140 mile an hour winds and 20 foot storm surge caused enough damage. It maintained Hurricane strength up into Virginia. 30 miles up the coast from Charleston, the fishing village of McClellanville was virtually covered by that huge wall of water. 150 miles inland, Charlotteans were digging out from under broken limbs, toppled electric poles and downed trees for weeks.

September 21st is also the anniversary of the deadly 1938 Hurricane which struck the northeast (parts of New York and New England), claiming some 600 lives.

Military Efficiency on Display in NOLA

2005-09-20T23:01:00.000-04:00

General Honore is a welcome breeze of fresh air! He's also an example of why the military is the one thing the Federal Government does right. With Hurricane Rita moving into the Gulf of Mexico, the Military is on site, staging for an evacuation of New Orleans again. Earlier today, the General stepped up and helped bail out Mayor Ray Nagin in a news conference, clarifying the situation and then fielding dumb questions from reporters -- some wanting to challenge what was going on, others trying to replay what did or didn't happen with Hurricane Katrina. But, you know what the General did? HE PUT THEM IN THEIR PLACES! An example:

"Question from male reporter on busing evacuees out: 'But General, that didn't work the first time...'

"Honore: 'Wait a minute. It didn't work the first time. This ain't the first time. Okay? If...we don't control Rita, you understand? So there are a lot of pieces of it that's going to be worked out. You got good public servants working through it. Let's get a little trust here, because you're starting to act like this is your problem. You are carrying the message, okay?'"

Later, another reporter tried a follow-up: "'General, a little bit more about why that's happening this time, though, and did not have that last time...'

"Honore: 'You are stuck on stupid. I'm not going to answer that question. We are going to deal with Rita.'"

WOW! Talk about telling it "like it is"! In fact, most reporters ARE permanently "stuck on stupid". Dan Rather comes to mind, for some reason...

Hat tip to RadioBlogger You can read his full post -- which includes a link to audio -- here.

A Bifurcated Wind

2005-09-20T11:58:00.000-04:00

Former US Senator John Edwards sees the Katrina aftermath as an opportunity to end ALL poverty in the "Two Americas" -- or at least for the one in which he definitely does NOT reside. Naturally, this topic falls nicely in line with his current gig as director of the UNC School of Law's Center on Poverty, Work and Opportunity. And just what DOES that position entail?

So far the former Senator seems to be spending most of his time AWAY from the UNC campus, traveling around the country and speaking to various groups (the Katrina comments were made Monday in a speech to the Center for American Progress in DC). Not only that, but he's been working with questionable political organizations, and doing fundraising for political campaigns, too.

All in a day's work for this politician in his supposedly "non-partisan" position. Edwards' position is privately funded -- making him an EPA (exempt from the personnel act) employee. You can see why, since IF his position was subject to the act, then this would apply:

"... employees... may not:

- Take an active part in managing a campaign, campaign for political office or otherwise engage in political activity during working hours

- Use the position’s authority or use state funds, equipment, supplies or vehicles to support or oppose a candidate, party or issue of an election

- Promise rewards to a state employee or applicant for state employment to gain support for or a contribution to a candidate or party*

- Threaten the employment of another state employee or applicant for failure to support or contribute to a political candidate or committee*

* Such actions are subject to criminal penalties under the law

Even still, my question is just how does he get to spend so much paid time away from the office? Is campaigning and speaking to political groups part of his "non-partisan" position? Sounds like partisan politics to me.

UPDATE: (Tuesday 9/20/05 at 11:10pm) Clarified Edwards position as privately funded, not technically a "state job".

About That Light Rail Project...

2005-09-19T08:26:00.000-04:00

EagleSpeak notes the pie-in-the-sky Triangle Transit Authority's Light Rail project which is projected to cost $630 million dollars and has been revised and revised and revised to the point it will virtually go NOWHERE anyone WANTS to go -- prime example, RDU Airport station has been eliminated from the project. Say WHAAAAT?

He references a May Carolina Journal report about Light Rail in North Carolina, which also looks at Charlotte's proposed system. I can tell you from living in Rock Hill, that one is a boondoggle, too. I may be proven wrong, but I think years from now it will be known as Mayor Pat McCrory's White Elephant. When all is said and done, you're looking at trying to put a prom dress on a sow.

The EagleSpeak post was noted by Glenn Reynolds on Instapundit, among a lengthy list of PORK BARREL PROJECTS the blogosphere is offering up to Congress as items that could be de-funded in order to pay the costs of Katrina rebuilding.

UPDATE (Tuesday 9/20/05 at 11:30am): Thanks to Jon Ham at The Locker Room, the blog of the John Locke Foundation in Raleigh for linking to this in his post. Be sure to check out the JLF's main site, and the online version of their outstanding publication, The Carolina Journal, for some illuminating reading.

3 1/2 Hours of Anguish vs a Sunday at the Park

2005-09-19T08:08:00.000-04:00

Okay, so you know I'm a loyal Carolina football fan. In fact, truth be told, it doesn't matter WHICH Carolina is playing: North, South or Panthers, I have a personal connection with all three. Three years in the football program at UNC (one as a player, two as a manager), our daughter is a sophomore at USC, and we got to know quite a few Panthers players from doing radio in the Charlotte market for nearly seven years and going to games. All of that translates into an wierd weekend just past.

Saturday was UNC's home opener against Wisconsin. It was Letterman's Day, so all of us former Tar Heels were invited to meet-and-greet at the annual pregame BBQ, mingle with old friends and go to the game. That much was great. The game was odd, to say the least.

As I noted last week, the Tar Heels' defense is much improved, thankfully. They held Wisconsin to 14 points and only 304 yards, despite the Badgers having the ball for more than 10 minutes longer than Carolina during the game. But poor results on 1st down, too many penalties (12 for 115 yards), and several key dropped passes (including a sure touchdown in the 4th quarter) killed any chance for momentum -- or a comeback. So close, yet so far. Badgers, 14-5. 0-2 start for the 'Heels -- should be 2-0. This ('') close. Bummer. Again.

Meanwhile, we tried to keep up with Steve Spurrier's Gamecocks via scoreboard update at the game. Plenty of folks were saying SC could beat Alabama in Columbia (WRONG -- Bama 37-14). Guess they were reading the wrong tea leaves. Even the 'Ol Ball Coach finds it's hard to win without a reliable running game. I should have guessed what might happen when daughter told me she had opted for the beach instead of the game -- and she's a big football fan. So the "Carolinas" went 0-2 on Saturday for the second week in a row.

Last week, the New Orleans Saints screwed up our Sunday, too, stealing one from the Panthers in Charlotte. And with the winners of 3 of the last 4 Super Bowls coming to town this week, Sunday didn't look to be too promising either. Fortunately, we had outdoor plans away from the radio and tv during the majority of the game. So I listened on the way to, and back from our outing. Surprize!!!! Panthers sounded okay on the way there. It was 7-7 when I turned it off in the first quarter.

So we get back in the car and there are 3 minutes to play. Just in time to hear Brady miss-fire on a pass but interference was called on Ricky Manning of the Panthers -- it's 1st down on the Panthers 39. Uh-oh! What's the score? What's the score??? Incomplete pass. 2nd and 10, 2 1/2 minutes left... Crowd noise is loud. Panthers still must be in this one... No idea of the score, still! Then Brady passes complete for 7, but... FUMBLE!!! Who's got it??? PANTHERS' BALL!!! Mick (Mixon) says "...that's one more nail in the Patriot's coffin...". Hey, Mick, what's the SCORE??? Are we REALLY up? They go to break on the radio and he says "...Panthers, by TEN." Oh, MY! Three DeShaun Foster runs net a first down and the victory formation can run out the clock! Jake Delhomme takes a knee twice and... heh! Cats 27, Pats 17! Almost makes up for Saturday.

Maybe I should plan some activity for this Saturday, say between 12:15 and 3... That way we can catch the beginning and the last few minutes of the 'Heels at NC State. Don't laugh...it worked with the Panthers!

Only a Matter of Time

2005-09-16T14:40:00.000-04:00

You knew it would surely happen. When the feds started handing out money to people displaced by Katrina, it was only a matter of time before someone got caught cheating the system. Tiffany Signal of Raleigh claimed to be homeless because she "lost her home" in Katrina. She conveniently didn't have ID because it was "lost in the storm", too. Her real neighbors in Raleigh told police they "knew she was going to lie to the Red Cross". Signal is now a guest of Wake County -- under $3,000 bond.

How many more "victims" out there will be found out to be scammers? Probably more than we even imagine.

A Good Day (and Night) for GW

2005-09-15T22:54:00.000-04:00

I can't think of a day recently that has gone as well for President George W. Bush. From the outstanding performance his nominee for Chief Justice of the Supreme Court managed in the Senate over the past several days to an outstanding speech tonight in Jackson Square in New Orleans, it was a great day by all measures for the President.

Judge John Roberts proved time and again over the hours of "inquiry" before the Senate Judiciary Committee he is one of the most impressive jurists ever to be nominated to the nation's highest court. It will be interesting now to see how the votes will fall in committee and in the Senate as a whole. If it is a straight party-line vote, it will make it easier for the President to nominate whomever he chooses to replace Sandra Day O'Connor -- surely the American public will not believe Judge Roberts is in any way out of the mainstream, nor deserving of a unanimous no vote from Democrats.

Add to that, the response to the President's speech on rebuilding the Gulf states after Katrina. It appeared on television he received nearly unanimous support from the persons who were displaced by the storm. He gave them hope, leadership and confidence when they most needed it. If he can follow-through, the "Bush is to blame" crowd just lost all credibility.

It will be interesting to see how the mainstream press plays-up these events. No doubt some, especially liberal Democrats, the leftist blogocracy and a few liberal pundits will try to pooh-pooh these things and derail the momentum, but that will only serve to further highlight the disconnect between themselves and reality. The public is catching on -- and none too soon.

UPDATE 1: (Fri 9/16 at 10:50am) It seems as if the last paragraph was right on the money. Right away AP tried throwing cold water on the speech. I loved Jason's reaction at Polipundit on the AP story: "...the actual story quickly degenerates into a revolving conundrum of liberal emoting and partisan-Democrat talking points...". Also, the Democratic "leadership" in Congress jumped on the anti-Bush bandwagon out of the box, led by Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi. The lib's playbook is as obvious as Ohio State's under Woody Hayes in the '50's and '60's (off-tackle right, off-tackle left...): "Bush is at fault, Bush is incompetent, Bush can't ever hope to get it right...". In reality, if Bill Clinton delivered the same speech last night, the Dems would be hailing it as the greatest speech since ~~the Sermon on the Mount~~(Oops, can't use religious metaphors. Secular humanisim and all, you know...) "I Have a Dream".

UPDATE 2: (Sat 9/17/05 at 7:30am): As for how well Judge Roberts did, Beldar does some LLL Dem projecting.

Missing In Action Again

2005-09-14T11:38:00.000-04:00

There's a Hurricane hitting the United States and where is George W. Bush? He's off rubbing elbows with foreigners at the United Nations. This man never learns, does he? Two weeks ago he was out west meeting with a veterans group when Katrina came ashore. Now he's in New York while North Carolina is threatened. Can't our President prioritize any better than that? I mean, leaving the emergency management to state and local authorities -- has he no shame? Everyone knows the President must call every shot. No one can exist without guidance from Washington. And where's FEMA when you need them? They're in Louisiana and Mississippi and Aladambama, for heaven's sake! Can't they get better organized than that? Didn't they learn from their previous mistakes? What buffons! Fire them all! Impeach Bush! When will the cavalry arrive to save the day? We're waiting!

In case you didn't GET IT, the above bloviating is a parody. Unfortunately, it's not inconceivable these days that such idiotic ranting might just appear on a leftist blog -- or even in the MSM -- or be spoken by a liberal Democrat politician.

By the way the local emergency management folks, mayors, county and state officials are doing the jobs they're supposed to do, thank you very much. They'll put in a call for help if and when they need it, and not blame others for their own errors. It will be a marked difference from two weeks ago, but the mainstream press won't make a big deal out of it. Just watch them and see. I hope I am wrong.

Twisted Logic

2005-09-14T08:45:00.000-04:00

Two of the most elaborately twisted notions have been and are continuing to be trumpeted as conventional wisdom by liberal Democrats, the left-wing blogocracy and the MSM. It's time to address these things clearly and nuke the CW. To wit:

1 - The observation: The vast majority of victims of Hurricane Katrina were poor black people. The conclusion: This shows we've not been doing enough to help stamp out poverty in this country. Sample of an actual quote: "...which is why we need to do some work on the income disparity, asset building. There's a whole group of things we need to do to help with that problem." - former Senator John Edwards, on Hardball with Chris Matthews. Response: Collectively, we have spent over 6.5 Trillion dollars (GAO figures) in the "war on poverty" since 1964. HELLO!!! It's NOT going to help throwing MORE money at the problem. Let's figure out how to help the poor access the main stream rather than teaching them to keep putting their hands out. Part of the problem that so many poor folks stayed behind is they've been taught to wait for Government to help them, rather than learning self-reliance and how to be self-sufficient. In fact, the conclusion really is: This shows we've been doing too much to teach people to be dependent on Government, and keep them in a perpetual state of poverty.

2 - The Observation: The the levees were insufficient and were a disaster waiting to happen. The Conclusion: The feds screwed-up by not paying attention to a potential problem (that EVERYONE knew about) and not allocating enough money to fix it before it became the disaster that's been waiting to happen all these years. Sample of an actual quote: "...the culprit is not the president but government-wide resistance to investing long-term in projects such as flood control." That quote comes from Michael Parker, former assistant secretary of the army for civil works. Response: In fact, the Environmental movement in this country prevented the Army Corps of Engineers from "fixing" or "preventing" this problem, beginning years ago. See here and here The lawsuit by an environmental group called "Save Our Wetlands" in 1975, prevented the Army Corps of Engineers from building a series of floodgates which could have prevented exactly the kind of flooding which occurred after Katrina. In fact, the conclusion really is: The insistence by environmentalists of valuing "wetlands" over humans has proven deadly in this case.

They can pretend all they want that their version of the "truth" is correct, and that only their agenda will serve the people. Unfortunately, there are obviously no mirrors in the "reality based" community, or else they'd be able to see their own agenda for what it really is -- a poison pill for America's future.

Intellectual Elite? Riiiiight!

2005-09-13T08:43:00.000-04:00

According to the Raleigh News and Observer, this past weekend an inebriated UNC-Chapel Hill student, cited for his rude public behavior, walked 50 feet and did the same thing again -- and was arrested again. They say the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again hoping for a different result. Don't you know his parents are proud of him for the "recognition" he has received at college. Guess you could say he wanted to "leave his mark" when he left. Only in Chapel Hill.

Announcer-Cheerleaders

2005-09-13T08:35:00.000-04:00

Being a follower of the Carolina Panthers has its ups and downs. As the 2005 regular season approached, Panther fans were getting jazzed-up for great things -- after all, with healthy players back, a good draft and a Super Bowl appearance two years ago, greatness seemed their due. It still could be, but you still have to play one game at a time. Sixteen times. Before the playoffs. Before the Super Bowl.

Last Sunday, the Panthers opened at home against the New Orleans Saints. If you read the sports pages or saw the reports (or even the game) on TV, you know the Saints won 23-20. A downer for the Panthers and their fans. Congratulations to the Saints on the win. Their fans deserved it.

What? Come again? Their fans DESERVED it? That's like rubbing salt in an open wound if you're on the Panthers bandwagon. Well it was the theme of the day on the Fox Sports broadcast of the game. Obviously, if you are a mindless sports announcer like Ron Pitts and Tim Ryan on FOX sports, you truly believe that was the case. Otherwise, why would Pitts and Ryan -- especially Ryan continue to sing that song all game long?

I can understand saying the Saints players may want to play extra hard to show their support for the folks back in N'awlins, and to try to bring some joy to them in an otherwise tough time. But just say so and get off the dime! Quit reminding us of Katrina at every turn -- which it seemed painfully obvious they were trying to do.

Granted, such talk would be understandable if they were on the Saints Radio Network, since they'd be paid to promote the local team. But not on a supposedly "independent" telecast. I may be wrong, but I don't think Fox has an ownership stake in the Saints. Maybe I'm wrong, but I also don't recall hearing where Fox Sports said its announcers should blatantly favor one team over the other on their broadcasts this season. Maybe I missed that.

Pitts and Ryan could not have sounded more caught-up in the "let's help the Katrina evacuees by being pro-Saints" mindset if they'd have said such things as (these are made up, but not far off what was actually said!):

"He must be thinking of the folks back home with that catch..." or
"Everyone in America's probably hoping the Saints can win..."

It was ALMOST that bad. Truth be told, they really said things like: "This could bring a big lift to the people back home." and "You gotta love the way the Saints are playing so hard for their fans." I almost threw a shoe through the tube.

I sure hope the Fox Sports "suits" were paying attention. These two hopefully won't get to broadcast any more Saints games this year. And a note to other FOX announcers: How about laying off the "let's help cheer-up the Saints fans" kool-aid. IT'S A GAME!!! These guys get PAID to play it. They're really NOT playing it for their fans, they're playing it to keep themselves EMPLOYED. Oh, and by the way, at least half of your audience is pulling for the OTHER team.

Silver Lining in a Black Cloud

2005-09-11T00:49:00.000-04:00

The North Carolina Tar Heel football team opened on the road at Georgia Tech Saturday, but fell to the favored Jackets 27-21. Tech has a solid team, give them credit, and Chan Gailey and his staff had them well prepared to go against Carolina. But, despite several series where the Yellow Jackets moved the ball well, toward the end of the first half and for the last half of the fourth quarter the Tar Heel defense rose to the occasion, stopping Tech in its tracks consistently. The tough play on D helped boost the offense to three -- and nearly four -- scores in just ten minutes of game time.

Unfortunately, there were too many mistakes on offense -- 3 interceptions, a few dropped passes, some missed blocking assignments, and other procedural matters which should be cleared up in practice. However, the Heels did have two shots to win the game in the last 3 and a half minutes, and any team would love to have similar circumstances.

Matt Baker will be better than he was against Tech, and once he gets used to game speed, he'll become more comfortable. For a guy who supposedly can't run, he did a pretty good job of avoiding the rush and finding the open receiver. He even scored the first TD for Carolina on an 11 yard QB draw.

James "Cooter" Arnold and Barrington Edwards looked good in the early going running the ball, but both were stymied in the second half. For Carolina to win more than a few games this season, those two will need to kick it in to the next gear.

Carolina's defense gave up a lot of yards again, but played well enough to keep the Heels in the game. They also forced Tech into several straight "three and outs" during the comeback in the second half. This defense is better than last year's. If the offense can keep them off the field better (by keeping drives going) than they did today, the numbers will look better.

This year's special teams seem to be as solid as they've ever been.

The old saw is the biggest improvement in a season comes between the first and second games. Let's hope that's true. It will be needed next Saturday when Carolina hosts Wisconsin. Looking forward to meeting up with other former Carolina Lettermen for Lettermen's Day at Kenan Stadium -- that's always fun.

Not So True After All (Lying Liars, Part Deux)

2005-09-09T08:38:00.000-04:00

Before we get too far afield, we should commend the Washington Post for blowing apart (pun intended) the recently trumpeted "truth" that the Bush Administration "cut" funding which would have reinforced the levees surrounding New Orleans, and thereby caused the flooding of city in the aftermath of Katrina. Some key points in Thursday's Page One article:

"But overall, the Bush administration's funding requests for the key New Orleans flood-control projects for the past five years were slightly higher than the Clinton administration's for its past five years. Lt. Gen. Carl Strock, the chief of the Corps, has said that in any event, more money would not have prevented the drowning of the city, since its levees were designed to protect against a Category 3 storm, and the levees that failed were already completed projects." [Emphasis mine]

Kudos also to the New York Times, which leads today with this factual presentation of how the relief efforts were snagged by political decision-makers, who simultaneously "begged" publically for the exact help they were keeping away.

Partisan Amnesia (or More Lying Liars)

2005-09-09T08:19:00.000-04:00

New York Senator Hillary Clinton claims the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina show the Bush Administration has undermined the productiveness FEMA had shown under her husband's administration. Todays Issues and Insights column in Investors Business Daily points to how ~~well~~ disgracefully inept FEMA handled the aftermath of Hurricane Floyd in 1999.

For supporting documents on just how "well" FEMA handled Floyd, see here and here. For an opinion on the long-term usefulness of FEMA see here.

Not OK to be Non-PC

2005-09-08T14:20:00.000-04:00

Perhaps the more stories we hear about the rediculous application of "Political Correctness" in a time of dire emergency may begin to help tip the balance back the other way. Surely we cannot survive being any more PC than we already are.

One of the most asinine revelations in the aftermath of Katrina is the story of professional firefighters volunteering their services to FEMA and being made to undergo the (apparently) standard battery of post-hire seminars reqired in normal times before NOT being allowed to do the job they normally do -- save people. "Lundy and Calhoun's first task was an eight-hour course on sexual harassment and equal opportunity employment procedures..." It's sheer idiotic bureaucratic BS.

We owe a sarcastic "thank you" to the wacko left in this country, and the spineless twits in Congress whom they've pressured into coming up with laws that require such pap in the first place. Then again you'd think FEMA would at least be able to understand the difference between permanent employment and voluntary help in a crisis. They ought to fire the idiots who thought of this step in the process. Sounds just like the TSA's not being able to "profile". Wow, I hope you feel safer in the case of disaster or if you are going to fly. I sure don't.

Political Opportunism - Part 3

2005-09-07T22:45:00.000-04:00

Quick... name the two biggest political stories of today. Right, Hurricane Katrina and John Roberts. What, other than the coincidence they're in the news at the same point in time, do they have in common? Nothing, you say? As Ed McMahon ,might have told Johnny Carson, "Wrong-oh, M-S-M Breath". Leave it to the DemocRATS to figure how to use an act of nature against a nominee to the Supreme Court. It's all in black and white on Boston.com (the web site of the Boston Globe):

"The scenes of devastation featuring primarily poor African-American residents in New Orleans have highlighted the widening gap between rich and poor, said Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts.

"With Roberts having urged a narrow interpretation of civil rights laws in the past, Senate Democrats will link the scenes of economic hardship with the constitutional and legal issues that surround efforts to address racial and economic inequalities, he said."

Do Senator Kennedy and his Democrat colleagues automatically believe ALL poor people are black? Does he only see things as black and white and as opportunities to divide rather than unite?

What. A. Load. Of. Crap.

Come Again?

2005-09-07T13:12:00.000-04:00

If anyone can provide the proof of this "rumor", let me know. Heard yesterday that North Carolina Governor Mike Easley and his family spent the Labor Day Weekend at their beach house in Brunswick County -- and got there and back by state helicopter. This was just days after Easley warned state residents of dwindling fuel supplies and pleaded for voluntary conservation methods. Not only that, but he asked state agencies to shut-down all "non-essential travel" using state vehicles. Sounds like it was too much for him to ask his family to conserve.

Political Opportunism - Part 2

2005-09-07T11:53:00.000-04:00

Raleigh News-Talk radio station WPTF has been saying all day that some North Carolina politicians are talking about eliminating the State tax on gasoline -- for a month. Meanwhile, the price of gasoline is already dropping due to market forces. Again, LET THE MARKET FORCES HANDLE IT!!!! Not that I believe the state should charge THAT MUCH per gallon of gas in tax, but artificially lowering the price will drive up demand in a time where supply is still tight, thereby driving up the price again. Really, these politicians need to understand how economics works.

Political Opportunism - Part 1

2005-09-07T11:44:00.000-04:00

Former Vice Presidential candidate and former Senator John Edwards continues to see "Two Americas". In today's Raleigh News and Observer, Edwards is quoted as applying his 2004 campaign theme to the Hurricane Katrina aftermath, "We see the poor and working class of New Orleans who don't own a car and couldn't evacuate to hotels or families far from the target of Katrina... We see the suffering of families who lived from paycheck to paycheck and who followed the advice of officials and went to shelters at the Civic Center or the Superdome or stayed home to protect their possessions... We have been too slow to act in the face of the misery of our brothers and sisters. This is an ugly and horrifying wake-up call to America." So what does he plan to do about it? Start a lecture series on the subject at the UNC Law School, where he is the current Director of the Center on Poverty, Work and Opportunity. I'll bet that really cheers-up the folks who lost everything in the storm, huh? You can hear them now, "Man, that John Edwards REALLY CARES! He's worried about ME! Now I don't have to go through this ALONE!"

We Need a New Chief

2005-09-04T00:07:00.000-04:00

As if he needed more distractions in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, President Bush must now find a replacement for Chief Justice William Rehnquist, who passed away Saturday night at his home in Virginia.

Naturally, leftist lunatics wouldn't like it (leading most Democratic Senators to also howl) so it stands to reason Justice Antonin Scalia would make an outstanding choice as Chief. That's also my personal preference -- and then Mr. Bush could fill Scalia's seat with someone like Edith Jones or Edith Brown Clement or Michael Luttig.

We'll see how this plays out. As it stands, I'd think someone needs to be appointed Chief (and approved) before the October session begins.

UPDATE: Monday morning, President Bush announced he was shifting the nomination of Judge John Roberts from the Sandra Day O'Connor vacancy to the vacancy of the late Chief Justice William Rehnquist, as the new Chief. Good move. If he's confirmed before October 3rd, we'll have a full complement of Justices to begin the "Roberts Court" (O'Connor will stay on until her replacement is confirmed).

Not Solving the Problem 102

2005-09-02T08:17:00.000-04:00

The first semester course in marketplace economics (see post below)obviously is beyond the level of Governor "Easy" Mike Easley and Attorney General Roy "I wanna be like Mike" Cooper in North Carolina. The Governor is fanning the flames of panic by saying North Carolina might "run out of gas". He's asking "all North Carolinians to conserve gas", has suspended all "non-essential" state travel (using government transportation), and has implored the state's citizens to "carpool" and "limit non-essential road trips".

Meanwhile, Cooper said yesterday he wanted to know about "price gouging" spotted by consumers, and warned that his staff would "look into" those reports. Fortunately, he may not have dozed off in economics class as much as it appears Easley did. To his credit, Cooper did note the current gas price increases "were probably not illegal". Nonetheless, it makes consumers believe there MAY be some shenanigans going on, which further stirs the pot. Except for a few odd-ball cases when the fuel price is way out of line with what other stations in a general area are charging, it still doesn't mean there is anything going on except the marketplace finding its equilibrium price.

Needless to say, it would be best if public pressure on these two state officials does not cause them to make a bad situation worse: The Governor COULD declare a "disaster", which would allow Cooper to go after "price gougers". That would set into motion an artificial marketplace where demand would continue to rise, prices couldn't change enough to slow the demand, and a shortage would definitely occur. Let's hope it doesn't come to that.

Not Solving the Problem 101

2005-09-01T12:11:00.000-04:00

Liberal politicians are calling for all sorts of "remedies" to the current gasoline "crisis" -- which has been caused by a natural disaster's interruption of the petroleum supply lines, and NOT caused by the evil petroleum pals of George W. Bush.

In no particular order, Florida Senator Bill Nelson (D) is calling for a "price freeze" on gasoline. New York Senator Chuck Schumer (D) is calling for the President to empty the petroleum reserve (a 60 day supply) to help ease the crisis. New York Senator Hillary Clinton (D) is calling for a congressional hearings (and likely prosecution) of "price gougers". Wow, the left REALLY CARES!!!!

Get. A. Grip. First, note that none of these "ideas" will help get more gasoline into the pipelines coming from the Gulf Coast. Only the repair of any damage to the Gulf Coast refineries and breaks in the pipeline system, plus restoration of power in any of those immediate areas now without it will fix that. Secondly, building more refineries elsewhere would be an enormous help in easing the east coast's dependence on one primary supply area -- not to mention easing the supply problems faced in summer months by refiners having to make a laundry list of different blends of gasoline to meet environmental dictates in different areas. More refineries = better ability to handle demand. To that end, the EPA chief yesterday relented and will allow a temporary elimination of the requirements for certain blend fuels in certain areas, so that gasoline already available can be shipped around the country to areas where demand is most critical. HOWEVER... I digress. Back to the "CRISIS"...

A self-fulfilling prophecy is helping to add to the fuel crisis. All of this talk of a "gasoline shortage" by the media (to be perfectly clear, it is a SUPPLY CRISIS) is also causing normally rational people to hurry out to the gas pumps to fill up, thereby pushing up demand (which is also increasing the upward pressure on prices). Now back to Bill Nelson's idea:

Believe it or not, freezing prices when demand is soaring will cause the demand to further rise. Tinkering with the marketplace's natural regulation of price due to fluctuation of supply and demand will cause more problems. Left alone, and IF the news media had been honest (portrayed the actual "crisis" properly or at least sought out an economist without an agenda to explain what was going on) and politicians stopped trying to fan the flames of a trumped-up crisis to get back at Bush, here's what would have happened:

1 - News comes that pipelines are shut-off by storm, and people can expect supplies to run low -- but things are being done to help alleviate the problem in the short-term (EPA rescinds blend requirements temporarily, refineries in other areas will help direct fuel to areas running low). Price starts to rise because people will go fill-up cars (natural reaction to the news of a pending shortage), raising demand in the face of shortage, but as the prices rise, maybe some will not fill-up ALL of their cars or fill all of their gas gans at home hoping to "stock-up". Remember, they're told it will likely be a TEMPORARY situation.

2 - People who think the price is too high won't use as much (may decide to car-pool, ride the bus if possible, quit driving as much by planning their trips out to the store, etc.). This will help slow demand, thereby putting a natural brake on the upward price pressure.

3 - The pipelines go back on at a lessened capacity. More supply will help ease price pressure as well, but people will likely continue to keep their tanks full, which keeps some demand pressure on the available supply -- prices stay up.

4 - Other measures help ease the crisis on supply, lessening demand as well, as people breathe a sigh of relief... prices start to come down.

5 - Supply lines are back up to 100%. Prices will continue to fall to an equilibrium level below the level they were before the crisis.

Don't expect the actual cycle to be this simple. Panic puts additional pressure on the supply as people think they better get it at whatever price before it's all gone!!! If you add price controls to the mix, the demand (at whatever that price) will be artificially high, which will cause the supply to run lower and lower. In reality, higher prices have a downward pressure on demand, as it becomes too expensive to use as much as you're used to using.

Let's hope the Left's effort to paint Bush as the cause of all this doesn't continue to spiral out of control and cause us to do irreparable harm to our economy.

As for Schumer's idea, the President has already said he will make available some of the petroleum reserve to help out. BUT THIS IS A DELIVERY crisis, not a shortage of crude oil. This will have no effect at all on alleiviating the supply line problem.

Hillary's idea will put artificial pressure on the marketplace. The natural pricing pressure from artificially increased demand -- in this case, from the "we have a CRISIS here" mentality -- and a temporary shortage in the supply (30 million gallons a day less due to the pipeline problems), pushes the price up. But scared operators (who don't want to be prosecuted for "price gouging") will artificially keep the price lower than the marketplace would equalize it, thereby working like price controls to cause the supply to dwindle quicker and pose a bigger problem.

In case you are wondering, this is not some pirated piece. I do have a degree in Business, and I DO understand the marketplace and supply and demand. I also have spent 28 years in the media and understand the pressure to focus the story on the unusual and/or in the worst light.

It remains to be seen whether sanity wills out or not.

Lunacy on the Left

2005-09-01T09:11:00.000-04:00

Former Clinton aide Sidney Blumenthal has lashed out at President Bush in an online screed based in Germany. This should come as no surprise to anyone, as the European left has as much disdain for President Bush as the American left does -- possibly more. In fact, the German environmental minister lashed out publically against the President and the people of the United States earlier this week, saying the failure of the US to sign the Kyoto Protocol is the primary reason Katrina caused such devastation to Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama. They really love US over in Germany. Let something of this magnitude hit THEM, and see how fast they'll be calling on the United States to help -- and no doubt criticizing us for not helping faster.

Now the American left is getting excercised over how much "Chimpy McBushitler"'s War on Terror has caused us to: 1) have too few National Guard members available in Louisiana to help, 2) diverted funding from fortifying New Orleans' levees to Homeland Security, 3) prevented us from paying attention to immediate domestic needs, 4) was out of touch with victims' needs, and on and on.

Yet, not one of our so-called intellectual elites who so easily cast blame has offered one scintilla of a positive idea on how to make things better NOW and in the future for the ~~thousands~~ millions affected by Katrina. Much easier to point fingers than reach out a helping hand, I guess.

GWB as GOD?

2005-08-31T12:31:00.000-04:00

You knew it wouldn't take long in this highly-charged climate of political rant-o-rama, but I don't think anyone would have bet on this popping up so fast. But considering the source, it is not that surprising, I guess. But let's get one thing straight from the start: Mississippi Governor Hailey Barbour and President Bush had as much to do with Katrina as RFK, Jr. did. For that matter, "Global Warming" might even create COOLER temperatures in equatorial oceans due to melting of polar ice, right? Even if Kyoto was approved by this President, it wouldn't have had any effect at this point, so to blame Barbour and Bush for Katrina is the height of idiocy. Quite aside from the fact that posting that sort of political ankle-biting while rescue operations are going on and people are still missing is beyond the pale.

Let's also remember that the vast majority of "bad" hurricanes occurred long before we ever heard the words "Global Warming". In fact the hurricane experts are saying "Global Warming" has NOTHING to do with the current (or past or future)hurricane cycle.

Back Again

2005-08-31T12:29:00.000-04:00

Sorry, I have been knee deep in back to school the past week, and have been negligent in blogging. Will try to get back on track in the next few days. Thanks for coming by.

'Noles Win Battle with NCAA (For Now)

2005-08-24T22:35:00.000-04:00

Florida State University, which had been one of eighteen schools in the cross-hairs of the National Collegiate Athletic Association over its use of ~~Indian~~ "Native American" imagery and nicknames, got the all clear from the collegiate sports governing body earlier this week. Of course, it probably didn't hurt that the President of the University, T.K. Weatherell, was willing to sue the NCAA over the inclusion of his school in the organization's "red"-list.

Let's see how long it takes for Utah (Utes), Illinois (Fighting Illini) and North Dakota (Fighting Sioux) -- all of which have some sort of arrangement with their respective tribal namesakes or their descendants -- to seek similar ~~head~~ er, redress.

A Little Perspective, Please

2005-08-24T08:02:00.000-04:00

I was churning over my thoughts on the subject of military deaths in the War On Terror yesterday trying to figure out how to best put it. The news media and the leftist terrorist-sympathizers (how else would you describe those in this country who wish President Bush ill will and want us to give up in Iraq and pull-out?) are having an orgy over the more than 1,800 military casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2001. But compared to other military ventures, isn't this an absurdly SMALL number? 58-thousand in Viet Nam over the 15 years (give or take) we were there works out to, what? Almost 3,900 per YEAR. That's almost 8 times the casualty rate (on average) of the current War On Terror. Yep, just like Viet Nam, eh?

Or what about accidental deaths in the military on average? What's that number? Well, as it turns out, someone else was thinking the same thing. Only puts it even better -- John Hinderaker at Powerline has this very subject covered to a "T". The answer to accidental deaths is even more amazing (quoting from his post):

"The media's breathless tabulation of casualties in Iraq--now, over 1,800 deaths--is generally devoid of context. Here's some context: between 1983 and 1996, 18,006 American military personnel died accidentally in the service of their country. That death rate of 1,286 per year exceeds the rate of combat deaths in Iraq by a ratio of nearly two to one.

"That's right: all through the years when hardly anyone was paying attention, soldiers, sailors and Marines were dying in accidents, training and otherwise, at nearly twice the rate of combat deaths in Iraq from the start of the war in 2003 to the present. Somehow, though, when there was no political hay to be made, I don't recall any great outcry, or gleeful reporting, or erecting of crosses in the President's home town. In fact, I'll offer a free six-pack to the first person who can find evidence that any liberal expressed concern--any concern--about the 18,006 American service members who died accidentally in service of their country from 1983 to 1996."

Amazing. Especially considering we're fighting a REAL war here. So how about some HONEST reporting for a change -- in PROPER context. Hmm?

Disney Throws Michael Graham Under the Bus

2005-08-22T23:28:00.000-04:00

WMAL(AM), Washington, DC, radio talk show host Michael Graham's three week suspension from the air for upsetting the folks at CAIR (The Council on American-Islamic Relations) has become permanent. Disney, through it's ABC Radio division, which owns WMAL, has given in to pressure from the group which has a track record of hammering media outlets and companies over "unfair" portrayals of Islam. Granted, Michael Graham could have chosen his words more carefully, but Disney's actions are certainly no more commendable.

They Giveth, and They Taketh Away

2005-08-22T09:47:00.000-04:00

State Government. Not much better than the Federal one.

North Carolina's State Employees will receive a modest 2 percent or an 850 dollar annual raise (whichever is higher) in accordance with the new State Budget. But right on the heels of that, the State Health Plan has announced some changes. Beginning October 1st, they'll be increasing the cost of coverage to state employees, thus eating-up most of that "generous" raise. In simple terms, let's take the state worker who makes LESS than the $42,500 annual salary (the average state employee makes about $35k, according to experts) -- necessary to peg his or her raise to over $850.

Say that person has the average family to support and cover with healthcare. Then note the increase in cost the employee pays for coverage of his or her spouse AND kids from $427.48 per month to $ 480.14 per month beginning October 1. That's an increase of $631.92 a year in premiums alone. Not to mention that the employee portion of the costs in some areas of the health plan have gone up too.

So that $850.00 raise, less the $631.92 increase in premiums, gets that State Worker just $8.38 more in salary per pay period (every two weeks), meaning that after taxes, that State employee will be taking home about five bucks more a pay period.

Good thing the Legislature saw fit to throw in an extra week's paid vacation in the budget for all those State employees or it would truly be nothing but hot air from Raleigh to most.

Oh yeah? Gore WON? Really, now!

2005-08-19T14:02:00.000-04:00

You've got to be kidding. Paul Krugman, in today's NY Times pompously and erroneously claims Al Gore won two different media-consortium recounts in Florida in 2000. He references Andrew Gumbel, an American working for The Independent, in England. Too bad Krugman forgot to research the FACTS. All he had to do was go here and here. Note the second source is Krugman's own New York Times. Idiot can't even fact-check his story against his own newspaper! How superior he must believe his intellect is compared to "the great unwashed", and what a pathetic jerk he is to lie about facts that can easily be checked. To think the Times thought Jayson Blair was the one making stuff up!

Tough Being an al Qaeda Leader

2005-08-19T08:25:00.000-04:00

There is now only one key al Qaeda operative left on the original list of 26 most-wanted AQ in Saudi Arabia. Saleh Mohammed al-Aoofi, who was the latest Saudi AQ leader (and then one of the last two on the list), was gunned-down along with five other terrorists in a raid by Saudi police yesterday.

How long before the last man on the list is crossed-off? And the left keeps trying to tell us there are no signs terrorists are feeling any pressure.

The Real Deal

2005-08-18T12:53:00.000-04:00

I missed this earlier in the week, but having lived in that area for nearly 16 years, thought I should mention it...

Any city that has been around as long as Charleston, South Carolina, will have have suffered as well as celebrated many times over. Charleston has definitely had its share of bad -- both natural (hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes and the like) and man-made (like revolutions and actual wars), as well as good.

Charlestonians have always liked to celebrate the positives, and are rightly proud of their heritage. The city was founded in 1670 and is home to the first museum in America. A far more modern source of Charleston pride retired on Tuesday. Police Chief Reuben Greenberg was well-respected nationally for his 23 years as the city's top cop.

Mayor Joe Riley, commenting on the retirement, noted a key statistic in Greenberg's success story, "Charleston's population increased 64 percent during the time [he] was chief while crime decreased 11 percent." That speaks volumes.

Good luck, Chief, in your retirement.

Well, Well... WELL QUALIFIED, eh?

2005-08-17T21:44:00.000-04:00

Let's see if this makes it any easier. Most likely, the far left will totally ignore the ABA's "Well Qualified" rating and continue to try to bend the ear of such willingly-led Senators as Boxer, Kennedy, Kerry, Schumer and Durbin, among others. They will continue to carry the water for George Soros, People for the American Way, the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL) and others.

More on the Gorelick Wall

2005-08-17T11:52:00.000-04:00

Deborah Orrin, in today's New York Post has the skinny on a 1995 memo from New York Federal Prosecutor Mary Jo White blistering the Justice Department's use of "the wall", saying it could have deadly consequences. She had opposed the wall since the discussion of separating intelligence from law enforcement was proposed.

Funny... we heard nothing of THIS memo in the 9-11 Commission report.

Back to My Original Question

2005-08-16T22:29:00.000-04:00

Despite all of the posturing on the Able Danger controversy(?), as noted on Friday there are a couple of interesting points aside from the purported fingering of Atta and several other 9-11 hijackers. Today, John Podhoretz, commenting on National Review Online's "The Corner" Blog, hits on the MOST important associated point of Able Danger -- the fuzzy relationship between Jamie Gorelick, "the wall" and the 9-11 Commission's disinterest in the linkage.

Cindy Sheehan -- Just Another Moonbat?

2005-08-14T10:07:00.000-04:00

Don't think for a minute I don't empathize with Cindy Sheehan, the 48 year-old mother whose son Casey was killed in Iraq. She, as we all would in the same circumstance, hurts deeply and rightfully so. But her one woman crusade to try to move public opinion and the will of the administration to give up the cause for freedom in the Middle East is just nuts.

The MSM first focused on her desire to meet with President Bush to discuss the death of her son. They were painfully slow in clarifying(say ten or more days after the coverage started) that she ALREADY met with the President last year. She's using the willing media to help carry her water in promoting her anti-war stance. Nothing wrong with being anti-war, mind you, but look at what she said yesterday:

"You get America out of Iraq and Israel out of Palestine and you'll stop the terrorism...

"My son was killed in 2004. I am not paying my taxes for 2004. You killed my son, George Bush, and I don't owe you a penny...you give my son back and I'll pay my taxes. Come after me (for back taxes) and we'll put this war on trial."

"And now I'm going to use another 'I' word - impeachment - because we cannot have these people pardoned. They need to be tried on war crimes and go to jail."

MEMO to Ms. Sheehan: You're not the only parent to lose a child in the cause of freedom in Iraq. Yes, it hurts, horribly. To you the actions of the administration in fighting the GWOT were personally devastating -- but your son and the near 2,000 other Americans killed in Iraq and Afghanistan volunteered for service to the country. He believed in something that you, quite obviously, do not. We did not start this war. It's been building for years. On 9/11/01 it came to us. We have no choice but to fight back. AND WIN. Whatever it takes.

By the way, getting America out of Iraq will do nothing to stop terrorism. In case you forgot, 9/11 occurred well before we went in to Iraq. As did the bombing of our Embassys, the attack on the Cole, the first World Trade Center attacks, and on and on. The terrorists have been after us and our way of life for years. Long before Gulf War 1, even. So let's be real. Us out of Iraq won't stop them from trying to erradicate us from the planet. You must know that, don't you?

Your son Casey was in Iraq helping to build a free society in a country where oppression was once the rule. Freedom that will allow people there to enjoy the same kind of freedom you have here -- which allows you to protest as you do. They did not enjoy that freedom before. With your hatred and vitriol, one can only presume you'd prefer them not to have it in the future. Fortunately for them, President Bush is not listening to you.

Panthers Kick-off Preseason

2005-08-13T11:17:00.000-04:00

The 2005 Edition of the Carolina Panthers defeated the Washington Redskins (known to the PC as the "Washington professional football team") at Bank of America Stadium in Charlotte 28-10. Running Back DeShaun Foster and Pro Bowl Defensive star Kris Jenkins were two of many Panthers to get back on the field following an injury-shortened 2004 season. Go Cats! Headed for SB XL? Let's hope!

DeShaun Foster scores against the Philadelphia Eagles in the 2003 NFC Championship game.
Posted by Picasa

Good Ol' Sandy, Second Rate Berg-lar

2005-08-12T23:05:00.000-04:00

Remember what former President Bill Clinton said when his former National Security Advisor, Sandy Berger, "inadvertently" stole highly classified documents from the National Archives? Something to the effect of, "Heh, heh, yeh... that's Sandy. We were all laughing about it on the way over here this morning... He always had a messy desk, too..." Don't the revelations of this week regarding Able Danger make you wonder if what Ol' Bill was REALLY thinking when he said that was more like, "Whew! Good Ol' Sandy... heh, heh, yeah... he's so disorganized, no one will ever know what he really took!"

And it appears the 9-11 Commission's final report was missing more than just the references to Able Danger's information.

If you're still curious as to why the "wall" wasn't enough to get Gorelick kicked-off the panel and into the witness chair, John Podhoretz has a pretty good idea.

UPDATE (8/13/05 at 11:02am): Speaking of Gorelick and "The Wall", Nick Danger at Redstate.com has all the background you could want.

UPDATE 2 (8/13/05 at 11:07am): The New York Times and the Washington Post are furiously trying to throw water on Able Danger. Captain Ed has the follow-up. When the MSM's two biggest old-line liberal newspapers pull-out all stops to try to derail a building controversy, you know there must be some real fire behind the smoke!

UPDATE 3 (8/17/05 at 10:24pm): Someone else is now asking the same question about Sandy Berger's adventures at the National Archives.

Extremist Group Pulls Discredited Ad

2005-08-12T00:33:00.000-04:00

The National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL) has decided to pull its lying ad from CNN and other venues. (Hat Tip: Drudge!)

The Commission on "Connecting the Dots" Didn't

2005-08-11T13:22:00.000-04:00

The more we learn about the 9-11 Commission and its failure to pursue evidence that didn't fit its preconceived notions, the more it looks as though the Commission was really just another means to "get Bush", rather than be the distiller of fact it was intended to be. That some of the 9-11 hijackers were identified as possible "terrorists" as much as two years before they carried out their carnage speaks well for certain aspects of intelligence gathering at the time. However, the Clinton Administration's fanatical desire to treat terrorism as a legal matter may be the underlying reason over 3,000 died on our shores four years ago. That Jamie Gorelick -- the Assistant Attorney General who devised the "wall of separation" which kept intelligence gatherers from sharing information with law enforcement and vice-versa -- was allowed to be a member of the Commission and not a key witness in front of it, still smells like a festering swamp.

Democrats were allowed to choose half of the Commission's members, as were the Republicans. But the question that is begging to be answered is this: who suggested Gorelick for the Commission? Why not someone not so closely aligned with the previous administration's efforts to deal with terrorism?

On Tuesday, Pennsylvania Congressman Curt Weldon went public with information that a defense intelligence unit had identified Atta and other future hijackers months before 9-11. Weldon said a year prior to the attacks on New York and Washington, the intelligence unit recommended the information be given to the FBI so Atta's terrorist cell could be neutralized before it could inflict serious harm. He said lawyers for the Department of Defense said the intelligence couldn't be shared because Atta and his associates were "in the country legally". Weldon said he was told the 9-11 Commission had been briefed on two occasions of the information collected by the intelligence group known as "Able Danger".

Wednesday, panel members and staff down-played the "Able Danger" report, saying they had never been told of it. Weldon wrote to Commission co-chairs Lee Hamilton and Thomas Kean:

"The impetus for this letter is my extreme disappointment in the recent, and false, claim of the 9/11 commission staff that the commission was never given access to any information on Able Danger. The 9/11 commission staff received not one but two briefings on Able Danger from former team members, yet did not pursue the matter.

"The commission's refusal to investigate Able Danger after being notified of its existence, and its recent efforts to feign ignorance of the project while blaming others for supposedly withholding information on it, brings shame on the commissioners, and is evocative of the worst tendencies in the federal government that the commission worked to expose."

After denying it, Commission mouthpieces then said they had been aware of the information, but they discarded it because it didn't fit with the findings in their report! Confirmation the Commission was not the non-partisan finder of truth which it was supposed to be.

What, in fact, was the reason for leaving out this important piece of information? Protecting Gorelick? Protecting Clinton? Which brings up another point? Could the information about Able Danger's findings have been in those papers stolen from the National Archives by Sandy Burglar (er...uh...) Berger? Hmmm?

UPDATE: (Thursday, 8/11/05 at 11:45pm) The NY Times in Friday's edition confirms this bizarre failure of the Commission to "connect" its own dots!

It's ALMOST Here!

2005-08-10T09:12:00.000-04:00

John Bunting and the North Carolina Tar Heels begin preseason camp tomorrow (8/11). GO 'HEELS!

(Photo by Streeter Lecka/Getty Images)
Posted by Picasa

The Marginalization of CNN

2005-08-10T04:21:00.000-04:00

CNN, which has always had a somewhat -- and sometimes more so than others -- leftist lean, has always been a judicious user of the Annenburg School's FactCheck dot org when seeking to discredit or point out the truthfulness of political advertising claims. So why aren't they doing it in this case? [Hat-tip to Drudge!]

NARAL (the National Abortion Rights Action League) is going after Supreme Court nominee John Roberts with a bogus ad CNN has no problem running on its own network. Even though FactCheck says the claims it makes are untrue. Just another example of the MSM going to bat for the DNC.

UPDATE 8:39am: Fixed FactCheck link. Added link to ad claims.

NCAA Ruling Getting Plenty of Reaction

2005-08-08T14:55:00.000-04:00

As mentioned below (scroll down) the NCAA's Executive Committee may be PC, but it has opened a can of worms with its latest attempt to "encourage" member schools from using "demeaning" nicknames. You know, like "Fighting Irish" and "Ragin' Cajuns". Got to stop slamming the ancestry of fine Americans. Right on! Wait a minute, that's not exactly what they meant?

They're really opposed to such words as "Seminoles" and "Illini" and... what? Those words AREN'T demeaning or racist or insulting? Oh YEAH? the NCAA doesn't want to SEE or even to HEAR the words "Seminoles", "Utes", "Chippewas" or "Braves" any more. You'd think there had been some mass Native American uprising against the use of these names. Not according to polling on the subject.

Check out the thorough analysis at Protein Wisdom. Jeff Goldstein has done the heavy lifting on this. The results are not so surprising. Got to love the title to his post, too: "Concerned, guilt-ridden Whiteys to Native Americans: 'WE'LL tell you when you're outraged, Chief.'"

The NCAA Goes PC

2005-08-05T23:28:00.000-04:00

College and University Presidents may think they are the smartest men and women on the face of the planet, but the latest ruling by the NCAA's Executive Committee -- made up of the pointiest of the intellectual pointy-heads in our fair land -- makes me want to THROW UP!

As if we don't have more pressing things to worry about -- like getting student-athletes to GO TO CLASS, STAY IN SCHOOL and GRADUATE, so they can be a credit to both their community and alma mater, we now MAY NOT OFFEND. Even if the "offended" are not.

Welcome to political correctness taken to the extreme. From the text of the rule itself:

"The presidents and chancellors who serve on the NCAA Executive Committee have adopted a new policy to prohibit NCAA colleges and universities from displaying hostile and abusive racial/ethnic/national origin mascots, nicknames or imagery at any of the 88 NCAA championships."

Does that mean Notre Dame must look at changing from the Fighting Irish to something else to be PC with the NCAA? I can't think of any other school that uses a "national origin" nickname.

Next they'll be going after participant's names. Think that isn't a possibility? North Carolina's soon-to-be all-time leading pass receiver is named Jawarski Pollock (pronounced POE-lock like the slang for a person of Polish descent). He may be glad he's in his last year, or he might be looking to have to change his last name. Although it could force a change to Jawarski "Dreadlock", or something equally dramatic. Continuing with the ABSURDITY:

"The Executive Committee, meeting Thursday in Indianapolis, also approved recommended best practices for schools who continue to use Native American mascots, nicknames and imagery in their intercollegiate athletic programs.

"Colleges and universities may adopt any mascot that they wish, as that is an institutional matter," said Walter Harrison, chair of the Executive Committee and president at the University of Hartford. "But as a national association, we believe that mascots, nicknames or images deemed hostile or abusive in terms of race, ethnicity or national origin should not be visible at the championship events that we control."

Okay, right off the bat we'll have to start calling this the "Ban FSU, Utah and Illinois" rule... Must not have an "offensive" nickname. If you do, can't host an event. First of all, who is to say the indians, excuse me, the Native Americans are even mildly concerned about this, not to mention offended by it?

By the way, the Florida State Seminoles even have a long-standing agreement with the Seminole "nation" to use their name! In fact, the Seminoles receive untold POSITIVE promotional benefits from FSU's use of their name.

Thank goodness there is one pointy-head who is not impressed with this PC stuff... IN FSU's DEFENSE, the President of the University, T. K. Wetherell, has responded to the NCAA and its PC President, Myles Brand. Quoting President Wetherell:

"Florida State University is stunned at the complete lack of appreciation for cultural diversity shown by the National Collegiate Athletic Association's executive committee, which announced today a policy banning schools using Native American names and symbols from hosting NCAA championship events. That the NCAA would now label our close bond with the Seminole Tribe of Florida as culturally "hostile and abusive" is both outrageous and insulting.

On June 17, the Tribal Council of the Seminole Tribe of Florida spoke unequivocally of its support for Florida State University in its use of the Seminole name and related symbols. Accordingly, I intend to pursue all legal avenues to ensure that this unacceptable decision is overturned, and that this university will forever be associated with the "unconquered" spirit of the Seminole Tribe of Florida."

Neither Utah's nor Illinois' official athletic sites have any response to the NCAA legislation at this point, but it's good to see Bobby Bowden U is on the warpath (oops, must be PC), er uh, is ready to make a stand!

Let's hope PETA doesn't convince the NCAA to ban animal nicknames, or my head WILL EXPLODE!

UPDATE: (Monday 8/8/05 at 8:28am) My references herein to the Seminole Indians and FSU's agreements apply solely to the Seminole Indians OF FLORIDA -- the legendary "Unconquered" -- the descendants of whom have every right to associate their ancestors' "spirit" with FSU's athletic teams if they so choose. The university likely does not need the approval of the Oklahoma Seminoles (even though their number is nearly ten times that of the Seminoles of Florida), since the school is in no way claiming to represent them.

Also, I forgot about the Ragin' Cajuns of Louisiana Lafayette (Jake Delhomme's school), when I was commenting on "national origin" nicknames, and I believe there is a "Fighting Scots" somewhere, too. Nonetheless, lets see what the NCAA does with the Irish mascot. Bet they don't!

UPDATE 2: (Monday, 8/8/05 at 2:15pm) Anyone note the extreme irony in the fact the NCAA is headquartered in INDIANapolis, INDIANa? Guess they ought to have to move (again) if they want to really be PC.

A System In Need of (Smart) Leadership

2005-08-03T23:13:00.000-04:00

Fellow former UNC Tar Heel footballer Bob Lee Swagger has unloaded his latest screed at the North Carolina Legislature and has managed to wing folks from Manteo to Murphy in the process. Good Work BLS! He touches on the current "crisis" in higher education in the Old North State, which seems to demand larger and larger collagen injections of cold hard cash with regularity.

A few weeks ago, I had a discussion in a related vein with George Leef, a regular contributor to The John Locke Foundation's blog, "The Locker Room" (Note link to the right). My concern was that one of the big questions surrounding the departure of UNC System President Molly Broad was how much they needed to up the President's pay for the next (sight-unseen) one. I think this e-mail swap is still right on the money (so to speak!):

MY E-MAIL TO GEORGE:

"One thing you can 'bank' on these days is that educrats will presume that 'more money' is the solution to everything. Just think about it... need higher test scores? 'more money'... need better teachers? 'more money'... need more bricks and mortar? 'more money'... after all, it's just tax dollars. Not anyone's personal money. BUT just don't cut the fat and bureaucracy out of the education system... no, can't do that!

"If $300k+ was good enough for Molly Broad, then why is it not good enough for the next prez? Or is the presumption that Molly wasn't that good of a UNC president and now we get the chance to get a better one?

"Sheesh!

"The educrats will bankrupt us all."

TO WHICH HE REPLIED:

"The education industry has figured out that by wrapping all demands in the soft blanket of 'it's for the children' it's able to squeeze enormous amounts of money out of the taxpayers in return for less and less value."

Amen and Amen!

Let's hope sanity and reason will eventually win out. Not holding my breath, though.

Animal Rights and Wrongs

2005-08-03T08:27:00.000-04:00

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) may have over-reached with its over-the-top attitude. According to the AP, PETA staged a protest in Utah over the way Kentucky Fried Chicken slaughters its primary food staple -- chicken. The protest drew less than a dozen concerned animal rights supporters, but it also drew nearly three dozen diners -- showing their support of KFC with their wallets and stomachs!

Meanwhile, in Minnesota, Governor Tim Pawlenty says he's going out to dine on Walleyed Pike, in the wake of a PETA request that he declare the state fish off limits to fishing. He also says PETA should keep its nose out of "Minnesota's proud fishing lifestyle"!

Think folks are getting tired of being told what they should and should not do by a bunch of "do gooders" who have nothing better to do than scream and berate average Americans? I thought so.

I Swear

2005-08-01T08:32:00.000-04:00

Here in North Carolina, the ACLU, on behalf of a Muslim woman, is suing the state to get the Legislature to change the law and make the legal system more inclusive of all religions. The plan is to require all courts to have multiple religious texts so that someone of say, Muslim faith can swear on the Quran instead of the Christian Bible.

Interesting banter occurred this morning on WPTF in Raleigh. Kevin Miller's guest was Jennifer Rudinger, the Executive Director of the state ACLU. [FOR BACKGROUND on the lawsuit follow the link below]

Some callers argued tradition should be allowed to stand, a few said the country was founded on Judeo-Christian values, so others should just adapt. Rudinger says, in essence, she believes someone of a different faith may put more stock into "swearing" on their own religious text than on the Bible.

One woman, who claimed not to be very pious in her Jewish beliefs, pointed out Jews are not supposed to "swear" on anything. She says every time she's been asked to "swear" an oath she has said, "I affirm on my religion..." and that has been fully acceptable. She also noted it costs nothing for the state to let her do that, while the ACLU plan would have a steep price tag. Rudinger noted the law allows for that, as it is written in the statutes, but the ACLU is not disputing that point.

Something I did not hear was any Muslim commenting on "swearing" on anything. I mean, we're treated to horror stories by the news media of Quran abuse at Gitmo. We're told by the military that safeguards are in place to treat the Quran with utmost respect -- gloved hands, placing the Quaran on a clean towel, etc. -- because it is degrading to Muslims for an infidel to "touch" the Holy Quran.

So, what is it ACLU? If the Quran "abuse" angle is considered, wouldn't having a Quran available in the courtroom subject it to being abused by infidels? In fact, most likely an infidel would hold the Quran for a Muslim to "swear" on, which would be the heighth of blasphemy! The ACLU might also want to check on "swearing" by Muslims also. Seems to me they probably have rules about that, as well. And since Jews are not supposed to "swear" an oath, then aren't we back at square one?

The state of North Carolina (as do most) already allows a non-Christian to be sworn "with upraised hand," without any religious text being used, and -- as noted above -- to say "affirm" instead of "swear" and to delete the words "so help me God". SO WHAT'S THE PROBLEM???

Just what's the point? Is this really a useful debate?

Multicultural Mess

2005-07-30T02:38:00.000-04:00

Intellectual honesty will get you in trouble sometimes. Sort of like the old saw, "no good deed goes unpunished". In Washington, DC, radio host Michael Graham is off the air for now, for saying Islam is a "terrorist organization". In reality he took a pretty good analogy and went for the knockout punch when the velvet glove would have worked better. His analogy, as reported by the Washington Post, is well reasoned:

"If the Boy Scouts of America had 1,000 Scout troops, and 10 of them practiced suicide bombings, then the BSA would be considered a terrorist organization. If the BSA refused to kick out those 10 troops, that would make the case even stronger. If people defending terror repeatedly turned to the Boy Scout handbook and found language that justified and defended murder -- and the scoutmasters responded by saying 'Could be' -- the Boy Scouts would have been driven out of America long ago."

Now, if I'd have been making that point, I think I might have followed it up with something like:

So if you look at what's happening to the Islamic faith, as it has been hijacked by a relatively small group of extremists, one could make the case that Islam is a terrorist organization. The fact that far too many Muslim leaders have failed to condemn the actions of the extremists in the name of Islam goes a long way toward discrediting the claim that Islam is a "religion of peace".

Not Graham -- and that's what landed him on the beach. He, as he sometimes does, threw gasoline on a fire by following his analogy up with:

"Today, Islam has whole sects and huge mosques that preach terror. Its theology is openly used to give the murderers their motives. Millions of its members give these killers comfort. The question isn't how dare I call Islam a terrorist organization, but rather why more people do not."

Not too surprisingly, CAIR has jumped all over Michael Graham and ABC/Disney (which owns WMAL -- Graham's employer), which may have pressed the company into suspending him without pay. Ironically, though, the pounding of ABC/Disney happened on the very day CAIR itself issued a fatwa against terrorism.

Meanwhile, in the very same city, Washington Times Edtior-in-Chief, Wesley Pruden is no doubt just as excercised about Islamic extremists as Michael Graham, however, because he choses his words much more carefully, he makes a related point without the negative ramifications. Here's an exerpt:

"Many of the Muslims in Britain were put out this week when the cops in the West Midlands raided a block of apartments in Birmingham just before dawn and arrested several suspects in the latest London terror bombings.

"The raids showed "insensitivity" toward Islam, and the authorities, ever eager to improve "community relations"... invited the "moderate" chairman of the Central Birmingham Mosque to participate in a press conference to discuss the raids.

"The session had hardly begun before one Dr. Mohammed Naseem began a denunciation of the West, of Britain, of the police and other assorted infidels who had libeled Islam by suggesting that Muslims were in any way responsible for the bombing campaign in London...

" The superintendent of police said Mohammed... was probably suffering from shock brought on by "the unusual events of the last few hours."

"Remarked the London Daily Telegraph yesterday: "When senior police officers go to great lengths to make such prim and dubious politically correct statements, then it is not surprising that Muslim leaders such as [Dr. Mohammed Naseem] end up believing them, and expect to be taken seriously..."

"Public opinion in Britain, in fact, appears to be saying enough, already... The discovery that the suicide bombers of July 7 were homegrown, second-generation Englishmen, first bewildered many, then angered most. The diversity that everyone was encouraged to celebrate turns out to be fatuous, fraudulent and sometimes fatal."

Pruden goes on to make yet another interesting distinction:

"The real phenomenon of the age of terror is how the "infidels" -- the Christians, the Jews and the unbelievers -- have kept their cool and their ideals intact in the wake of a rich provocation to retaliate."

Boy, isn't that the truth!

Just Wondering (UPDATE)

2005-07-28T17:42:00.000-04:00

Apparently there's a new wrinkle to the Judith Miller story, which is the REAL story in "Plamegate". [Just who was Judith Miller's source or sources? -- see "Just Wondering" post from Monday 7/25, below (scroll down). Ariana Huffington proposes a new twist -- that Judith Miller cannot reveal her source, because SHE is it!

"Not everyone in the Times building is on the same page when it comes to Judy Miller. The official story the paper is sticking to is that Miller is a heroic martyr, sacrificing her freedom in the name of journalistic integrity.

"But a very different scenario is being floated in the halls. Here it is: It's July 6, 2003, and Joe Wilson's now famous op-ed piece appears in the Times, raising the idea that the Bush administration has "manipulate[d]" and "twisted" intelligence "to exaggerate the Iraqi threat." Miller, who has been pushing this manipulated, twisted, and exaggerated intel in the Times for months, goes ballistic. Someone is using the pages of her own paper to call into question the justification for the war -- and, indirectly, much of her reporting. The idea that intelligence was being fixed goes to the heart of Miller's credibility. So she calls her friends in the intelligence community and asks, Who is this guy? She finds out he's married to a CIA agent. She then passes on the info about Mrs. Wilson to Scooter Libby (Newsday has identified a meeting Miller had on July 8 in Washington with an "unnamed government official"). Maybe Miller tells Rove too -- or Libby does. The White House hatchet men turn around and tell Novak and Cooper. The story gets out.

"This is why Miller doesn't want to reveal her "source" at the White House -- because she was the source." [See the whole story via the Link below.]

Oh, NO!!! it's Oh-ZONE!!!

2005-07-28T12:22:00.000-04:00

The past several days in the Carolinas, there have been record and near-record temperatures... and along with the usual banter from the media about staying cool, keeping kids and pets out of hot cars and looking after the elderly, we're being warned of ORANGE and RED OZONE ALERTS!!! The discussion is being framed in such a way that one might think if you venture outside, DON'T STAY LONG, because THE AIR COULD CAUSE SERIOUS INJURY!!!

But wait, isn't the air actually CLEANER now than even 25 years ago? And, what's with this OZONE stuff, anyway? It must be some BIG THREAT TO MANKIND, right? Is it a Republican plot to starve our kids and put grandma on the street? In fact, you just KNOW that dastardly Karl Rove must have something to do with the EEEEEVIL ozone!

Well, time for a reality check. It's much simpler than that. To quote the EPA from its own material (see link for full report):

"In 2003, ozone levels nationwide were the lowest they have been since 1980.

"Since 1970, the VOC and NOx emissions that cause the formation of ground-level ozone have decreased 54 and 25%, respectively, despite significant increases in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and energy consumption. These emissions declined during the 1980s and 1990s and showed significant continued reductions in 2003...

"Since 1980, significant improvements in ozone levels have been measured across the country. One-hour levels have been reduced by 29%. Between 1990 and now we have seen a 16% improvement."

IN SUMMARY, our cars are more efficient, are better to the environment and the cities are cleaner over-all by far than just 25 years ago. So what's the problem?

The problem is that by reporting factually and congratulating everyone for doing a good job (so far), the environmental movement would lose power with governmental decision making, within popular perception, and the environmentalist organizations would not be able to scare people into forking over near as many billions in the name of "saving" the environment. With positive progress, the environmental movement has had to move into crisis mode to maintain their status quo. The main stream media is only too happy to go along with them.

Want proof? Here in North Carolina, Charlotte has been under RED ALERT the past three days (Raleigh/Durham and Greensboro were ORANGE). But according to the same EPA report cited above, Charlotte had 90% fewer days that exceeded the national air quality standards in 2003 than it did in 1980. At the same time, the population of the Charlotte Metro has increased by about 2/3rds (971,000 to 1,613,000), according to US Census estimates. No doubt motor vehicles have increased by even more during that same time, so what gives?

If the air is "bad" NOW, Charlotteans should have been dropping like flies in 1980, but they did not.

Less hysteria and more reasoned reporting would be welcome. Let's hear the REAL story -- that significant progress has already been made and that the air is much cleaner than it used to be, but even more can be done -- up to an economically infeasable point.

As it is presented now, however, the eco-freaks and their willing accomplices in the main stream media make it out as if al Qaeda doesn't get us, the Ozone will. But there is real danger in that philosophy.

If all of these warnings -- made to seem so dire -- are seen by the average person as just so much "crying wolf" (in that there's virtually no REAL discernable problem), then an unintended consequence could be that health warnings (such as those for ozone, and similar ones) may be shrugged off as meaningless. And THAT could prove to be a REAL problem down the road.

Freedom or Tyranny?

2005-07-27T00:00:00.000-04:00

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." [First Amendment, US Constitution, 1787.]

"I, ________________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God." [Oath of office, Congress of the United States]

"[N]o religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." [Article Six, US Constitution]

Would the grilling of a Supreme Court Nominee by a member of Congress on that Nominee's religious beliefs fall under the category of supporting and defending the Constitution of the United States, or bearing true faith and allegiance to the same? Certainly not. It clearly seems to me to be an example of prohibition of the free excercise of religion. It also flies in the face of Article Six.

But urged on by the MoveOn crowd, other extreme leftist organizations/contributors, and their own sense of the Senate's "advise and consent" requirements, Illinois Senator Dick Durbin, Senator Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts, and New York Senator Chuck Schumer may try to do just that to Supreme Court Nominee John Roberts -- attempt to discredit the nominee for his religious beliefs. Just because Roberts is a Catholic. Just because he is a Conservative. Must be an extremist religious nut case.

Easy, Senators, you complain tirelessly about those you disagree with "shredding the Constitution", or "trampling on our rights". Well if you go there, you're about to do just what you claim to deplore. I hope it doesn't come to that, but if it does, I hope the general public will see this sort of tactic for what it is.

UPDATE: [10:51am July 27] Added link to today's NEW YORK SUN editorial, "The Religious Test". For further background.

UPDATE: [12:01am July 28] Added references to Article 6, US Constitution.

Just Wondering

2005-07-25T12:13:00.000-04:00

While the MSM continues to over-inflate "Plamegate" in its reporting -- while having marginalized it in court briefings -- the real burning question (for which there must be no simple answer)is still: Just who is Judith Miller protecting?

The New York Times columnist has been sitting in jail for a couple of weeks, continuing to disobey Judge Hogan's order that she name her source(s) for an unpublished article. I presume she must have passed Plame information on to someone else in the news media or administration, else who would know she had a source for that kind of information. Why would she be in trouble for knowing something and not passing it on? Did her source rat her out? There is still something odd about that aspect of this case.

The heck with Joe Wilson, Valerie Plame, Karl Rove, Matthew Cooper, Time Magazine, and on and on. The real mystery is the Miller Affair. But neither Judith nor the NY Times are speaking.

Unbelievable

2005-07-25T08:22:00.000-04:00

Captain Ed this morning points out an example of the ratcheting-up of hate coming from the left toward mainstream america and mainstream values. He says:

"The family of a soldier killed in Iraq and just buried less than 24 hours earlier awoke the next morning to a fire in their driveway, which totaled the car of the soldier's sister-in-law. The arsonist(s) set the fire with 20 American flags that the family displayed yard, given to them by mourners at the soldier's funeral."

A vile example of what's wrong with the fringe left in this country. The hate they have is all-consuming. My question is this:
Just what do they find so repulsive about the grieving family of an American hero?

To paraphrase from "A Few Good Men", they should be thankful Pfc Timothy Hines was doing the things these folks wouldn't dare do in order to protect them and allow them "freedom" back home." Instead, this is the thanks he gets. Pathetic. Let's hope the authorities find who did this quickly and that justice is swift and complete.

One For The Books

2005-07-24T21:47:00.000-04:00

In sports history, it ranks right up there with Secretariat's 31-length victory in the Belmont Stakes to win the 1973 Triple Crown and with Team USA Hockey winning the Gold Medal in the 1980 Winter Olympics. It may last as long as Ted Williams' since-unmatched .406 batting average in 1941, the Miami Dolphins' since-unmatched perfect NFL Championship season in 1972 and Indiana's since-unmatched perfect NCAA Championship season in 1976...

7. In. A. Row.

Viva, Lance Armstrong! What a way to go out... You are, for all times, "MR. Tour de France".

THE University of Diversity (or something)

2005-07-24T17:18:00.000-04:00

Help! Liberal do-gooderism is running amok (again) on campus (not surprising)... Now it's creeping into continuing education! Of course THE University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill is well known for being a liberal hotbed... so I guess it was just a matter of time before this would rear its ugly head outside the undergraduate arena... [The following excerpts are from an e-mail making the rounds at campus last week -- for faculty and staff. It's about upcoming Continuing Education offerings for professionals...]

"The Training & Development Department would like to highlight two of its many course offerings from our Program Guide. Spaces are available in these programs and there is still time to register:

======================================
Fiber: What is it? What do you do with it?
======================================

This course is an elective for the Wellness certificate track."

Okay, we'll give them that one, even though it's presented as if the reader would have no clue as to fiber's benefits, but it's probably not a bad idea for health care professionals.

But check this one out:

================================
You're not from 'round here, are you?
================================

"This course is a core requirement for the Diversity certificate track.

"Cultural differences based on region-of-birth within the United States create distinctive speech communities whose vocabulary and interactive-style may lead to misunderstanding or ill-will in communities and among work colleagues. This workshop will help supervisors and employees to identify how regional differences influence assumptions, values and beliefs as well as communication patterns that can interfere with effective job performance, supervision and promotion. Differences in work group culture and style will also be examined for cultural influences such as profit vs. non-profit organizations, small vs. large companies, etc.

"In this session, participants will learn to do the following:
-- recognize the impact of region-of-birth on personal identity and development of speech community patterns (north-south, east coast-west coast, urban-rural, etc.)

"-- understand the differences between direct/instrumental and indirect/expressive communication styles and their affect
"-- explore how assumptions and lack of information sustain negative stereotypes about regional traits that may create inhospitable work environments in which people feel excluded and not valued

"-- examine cultural dominance and how it limits relationships and work performance in diverse work settings (profit/non-profit; academic/corporate, large/small companies, etc.)"

Gee, I honestly didn't know there was such a thing as a "diversity" certificate. Come to think of it, it may also be a prerequisite for the "Two Americas" course... Must check with the Law School on that -- don't they have some ex-Senator on the dole supposedly looking into poverty or something?

[As an aside, John Edwards was searching the midwest last week hoping to raise money (although I doubt it was to ward off poverty!). Come to think of it, I hope it wasn't paid time off... he hasn't been at UNC long enough to have earned more than a few hours.]

So let me get this straight: we're spending taxpayer dollars to teach supposedly educated people that folks from different parts of the country speak differently and (because of that) may be (unfairly) associated with certain stereotypes???

Are the "educrats" so thoroughly convinced they alone, just by pointing this out, can make everyone instantly get along better? Oh no, must not offend!

Hmmm... "Can't we all just get along?" Now where have I heard that before? Oh yeah, from Professor Rodney King! From the University of Hard Knocks (Literally) at LA.

Truly amazing. We have folks in this world wanting to kill all of us just for being Americans and the Ivory Tower elite folks want to make us all into politically correct inoffensive dweebs.

They really have no clue at all, do they?

Sharm-el-Sheikh is no London

2005-07-23T22:08:00.000-04:00

Now that terrorists have blown away at least 88 in the Egyptian resort of Sharm-el-Sheikh, a few pressing questions for those left-of-center (seems like oh, about 85 percent or more around here in the Southeastern Capital of Academic free-from-thought)...

1 - If terrorism is being driven by the changes in Iraq, then tell me please just how many troops does Egypt have in the Coalition of the coerced, bribed, etc.? They don't have any? Well... how can that be?

2 - If terrorism is aimed at the West and the Judeo-Christian world, then explain why it was mostly Arabs and Muslims who bore the brunt of the attack in Egypt? Were they just "collateral damage"? Innocent bystanders? Eh? Bad planning? I don't think so.

and 3 - This is the third terrorist act along the Sinai in the last year, following attacks at the resorts of Ras Shitan and Taba last October which killed 34. Why were these downplayed in the MSM? Too close to November and the US Election? No room to report on this? Might make the G-W-O-T look more serious? Hmmm?

One other thing. Can we ditch the phony 'root causes' diatribes we always hear? The ones about the causes being "poverty", the West, etc.? The people committing these acts care nothing about any of that. They don't care who they take out. They are fanatic extremists with absolutely no regard for anyone or anything. They are intent on bombing the rest of the world back to the dark ages. They. Must. Be. Stopped.

Just A Minor Thing

2005-07-23T10:25:00.000-04:00

Didn't want too much time to pass without referencing the fun side of my interests, and commenting on something that happened recently...

On Tuesday (July 19th), our old coach, the "Ol' Trench Fighter", Bill Dooley -- now the Triangle Chapter President of the National Football Foundation and College Hall of Fame -- hosted the groups' third annual Kickoff Luncheon. The special guests were the four Triangle area head coaches, Duke's Ted Roof, NC Central's Rod Broadway, NC State's Chuck Amato and UNC's John Bunting. It was a great time for all who attended the festivities. Thanks, coach for such a great event!

After lunch, each current coach was asked by the emcee, Don Shea, some questions about the upcoming season, football memories and just plain off-the-cuff stuff. It was a real blast hearing their responses, including quite a few verbal jabs between Bunting and Amato!

It was also fun catching up with some of the ol' Tar Heel teammates from before, during and after my time! John Bunting (of course), Ted Elkins, Rod Broadway (good luck on this coming season, coach!), Tim Kirkpatrick, John Anderson (thanks for getting the table, John), Walter Sturdivant, Paul Miller, Ricky Packard, Andy Chacos, Ken Huff, Don McCauley, Moyer Smith, Joel Bradshaw and many more were all in attendance. It gave the place a distinct Carolina Blue feel. Great to see Coach Dooley again after so many years, too! Pretty neat having the Doolz and two of his former players, Bunting and Broadway on the dais!

For a more in-depth look at the event with some audio, check out Andy Britt's write-up on InsideCarolina.com.

What the !#$@ ???

2005-07-23T09:58:00.000-04:00

Did I read this correctly? Yet another connection has been found between Saddam Hussein and al Quaeda? Its name is Ansar al Islam. You're kidding me, right? I thought those two were only mildly interested in each other -- fighting the great Satan and all that -- and were never really linked-up. Isn't that what the MSM is trying to make us think? Still? Apparently they were jointly interested in AaI as it regarded the Kurds -- Saddam wanting to bust on the Kurds, while al Qaeda was looking for a new location. Read the whole thing from Stephen Hayes and Thomas Joscelyn at the Weekly Standard.

Hello!

2005-07-23T09:12:00.000-04:00

Welcome to my weblog. I'm the G-man, a 50 year old Carolinian, who loves to talk about lots of things. My favorite subjects are politics, society, sports, aviation, and current events. I am first and foremost a conservative with libertarian leanings, meaning: I believe in small government, individual freedom and liberty. My favorite sports are football and basketball. I do also follow NASCAR and golf. Tennis is fun to play but boring to watch! Ditto golf, for that matter. I'm a fan of the North Carolina Tar Heels, where I went to school for 4 years (and was a member of the varsity football team for 3), the Carolina Panthers and the South Carolina Gamecocks, where our daughter is a current student! Feel free to comment on any and all postings, just remember to be polite and don't curse!