RIP x 2

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)

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

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!

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"?

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

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!

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

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

"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

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.

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

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

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

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?

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

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

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!

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

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

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

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

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!

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

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!

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

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

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

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

...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!

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

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)!

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?

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?

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

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

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

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

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

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...

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

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

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.