The Really Pathetic Blog

"Whatever" by Sifl and Olly: Incredible Music

2009-11-11T10:26:00.000-08:00

On a given night, Sifl and Olly could stand with any group in the world. Rock and Roll died when their show was canceled.

Let's Lighten the Mood?

2009-11-10T20:07:00.000-08:00

Jesus Was a Jewish Liberal

***

If Guns Are Outlawed Then Only Outlaws Will Accidentally Shoot Their Children

***

The above are the two best bumper stickers of all time.

Why I'm Cheering Against the Democrat (and for the 'Conservative') in the New York 23rd

2009-11-01T15:34:00.000-08:00

For starters, there no longer is a Republican on the menu so we're really only talking about a Democrat and a Conservative. It's been a long time since the NY 23rd has sent a Democrat to Washington. The DNC really doesn't even bother to try there.

But now, as I've been predicting for nearly a year, the Republican Party is coming unglued [Look at some of the older posts]. Just as Woodrow Wilson stole a Presidency from an otherwise tour de force (but deeply fractured) GOP in 1912, it would appear that Al Michaels could go back upstate and ask us all (or at least the Democrats among us) once again if we "believe in miracles."

I'm a registered independent and, during these most deeply divided of times, proud of it; however, if I lived in the NY 23rd I'd vote for the Conservative.

Here's why.

If the Conservative wins, then the GOP will hang itself. Read Frank Rich very, very carefully and then, if you're a Republican, tell me how you could possibly disagree with his assessment of where you're going? I'm serious. I'm not trying to win an argument. On the contrary, I don't see where there's an argument to win.

If the Conservative wins on Tuesday, it's over for you (Mr. and Ms. GOP). That's not hyperbole. Really, seriously . . . see you around 2016.

But what does that really mean? 2016 is seven years away. What might happen?

As a true moderate I've long been disappointed with the supposed options provided by our political party duopoly. So here's a little thought experiment. Let me know what you think:

1--The Conservative Party candidate wins the New York 23rd on Tuesday

2--The GOP's right wing faction becomes emboldened as Rich predicts it will

3--The GOP itself encounters a full blown civil war and ultimately splits. (Put another way, what has just happened in the 23rd, happens on a broad scale. By the way, when these things happen, they happen very fast. Look at the emergence of the Progressive Party in 1912 or the Reform Party in the mid-90's.)

4--This split allows the Republican Party to return to its moderate roots

5--The Conservative Party becomes the new home of the Palins, Becks, those nuts sewn up in tea bags (ahem), etc.

6--As the GOP begins to shift left, the Democratic Party does the same.

7--By 2014 or 2016, America is looking at a viable 3 party system for the first time since 1996. A genuine array of choices that speaks to a population with authentic political diversity (as opposed to the square peg-round hole slotting of our 308,000,000 on two sides of a largely contrived battle front) is in play. We all stop pretending that this current system works.

It's not that crazy. The Democrats are further right than they want to be while the GOP is a nosehair away from administering loyalty oaths. The two party system has expired its usefulness, this much is clear. We need another option---but that's not just going to happen organically. It's going to take a formed gap in need of filling. The Republican Party's version of The Real Housewives of Atlanta has done just that. We have a gap, people!

I applaud Sarah Palin for being outspoken about the 23rd. I mean it. Her 1st Amendment experience ought be no different from mine. And if she happens to have the mojo to flummox her party by being outspoken then maybe her party needs flummoxing. Maybe the right is fringe only in the context of a falsely defined method of organizing this republic. Maybe a two party system, like white male presidents, is a developing anachronism in this grand American experiment.

Lest we forget, the Founding Fathers screwed this part up. We needed a 12th Amendment to attend to the problems they failed to predict. Those problems were principally the result of an emerging two party system (If you're an opponent of the 12th Amendment, I've got two names [with attending titles] for you: President George W. Bush and Vice President Al Gore . . . in the same White House! Annnnnnnnnd now you're no longer an opponent of the 12th Amendment. Very nice!)

Maybe the Framers were right after all, just a couple hundred years too late. So, of course, this all means the Civics teacher in me has to keep going with the thought experiment:

8--By 2020, it's apparent that the Electoral College, which requires 270 of the 538 electors to choose a President, is no longer suitable for America.

9--A 28th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is ratified in short order. America begins to choose its Presidents as a result of popular vote

10--As has been the case for most of recent Presidential election history, winners are rarely able to secure a majority of the popular vote (Please review the data and then take note of what an electoral freak of nature Barack Obama truly was last year).

11--With no electoral college to prop up the falsely held assumption that our Chief Executives typically have the backing "of the people," the balance of power slowly shifts back to where it belongs, the legislative branch.

I'm eligible to retire from teaching at the end of the 2021-22 school year (unless Wisconsin's budget issues get so out of hand that they start incentivizing school districts to begin buying out expensive saps like me), but if the above happens, I'll follow in the footsteps of my grandfather and keep going to work on into my nineties.

Wouldn't the whole damn thing just be cooler than a cage full of albino baby tiger cubs? Be honest, you want it to happen.

On Tuesday, we're all Conservative Party members.

The Emerging Moral Dilemma of Football

2009-10-29T15:28:00.000-07:00

Before I proceed let me just point out that football is and has been a part of my identity. My father played in college (He was good). I have fond memories of gathering around the TV on Sundays, watching the Bears . . . and working angles on my parents to perhaps secure a delayed bedtime on Monday nights "If it was a good game." At the very least, we all agreed, I'd get to watch Howard Cosell's halftime recap of the previous day's showdowns.

It really didn't matter who was playing. From an early age, I found the sport intoxicating . . . probably for all the same reasons most people do.

So the last couple weeks have been a bit trying. At Milwaukee's Mitchell Airport, waiting to catch a flight to my cousin's wedding, I saw that one of my favorite authors, Malcolm Gladwell, had a cover story in 'The New Yorker.' I equate flying with impulse purchases of cool magazines I don't (but should) subscribe to, so I walked out of that CNBC Newsstand with my copy (and some Altoids) not knowing what I was about to get myself into.

Believe me when I write these words, I wish I'd of just grabbed an issue of Rolling Stone instead.

You should read Mr. Gladwell's work. Here it is. A word of warning, though. If you do read it (and it'll be pretty evident if you didn't because you'll say something like, "Well, that's a terrible comparison because dogs don't get to choose to be in dogfighting but humans get to choose to be football players" or some such thing) you're going to have to make some decisions. The one I'm wrestling with at present is whether or not I should just give in to the near overwhelming temptation to simply live in denial. Lord knows I do it with any number of other things in my life. Football's not going anywhere, right? It's way too ingrained in our culture.

And it's big business.

Here's one of the best examples I've seen in recent memory of mainstream media's conservative bias. Read here about Congress getting tough with the NFL.

So, by now, you've read Gladwell and you've read about the Congressional hearings the other day. When you read about Roger Goodell et al on the Hill, did you catch it? What got left out? What didn't get addressed?

Brett Favre arrives in Lambeau this Sunday while the little ones in the Fox Valley Pop Warner League are enjoying their first weekend off since just after Labor Day.

Here's a question.

What do these guys . . .

. . . and these guys . . .

. . . potentially have in common?

Anybody seen my copy of Rolling Stone?

Note to the GOP: Be Afraid, Be Very Afraid

2009-03-15T12:57:00.000-07:00

Let's try this again. Maybe I should call it the "Imminent Republican Party Irrelevance Watch."

I don't know. Perhaps flat out hubris is a part of the process in coming to a state of acceptance.

Let's begin with GOP Chair Michael Steele who has gotten himself in hot water twice now. He disrespected Rush Limbaugh and then confessed to being pro-choice (Word to pro life community: When you say you're personally pro life but believe that individuals should choose whether or not an abortion is appropriate for them, we have a name for you: Pro Choice). The problem is not Steele, but rather Steele's penchant for telling the truth by accident. For a party that fashions itself as a bunch of straight talkers, the GOP sure has problems with someone doing just that. The fact that Michael Steele would be in any sort of trouble at all for these comments is precisely the sign you need if you're looking to see where the minority party is headed. They're stuck in an old paradigm. (I've been making this point at this blog for a while now). They should be kissing Michael Steele's feet for offering an honest assessment of what the party needs for any sort of a future.

Let's start with someone who can explain it better than me. David Frum's conservative credentials are beyond question. Here's what he had to say about Rush Limbaugh. It's worth the time to take it all in (be you a Republican or a Democrat).

Then let's move to one of the most pragmatic economists you'll ever find: Kenneth Rogoff. Watch his recent comments on the G20 gathering, but hear them through the following filter: What should a Republican, who would ostensibly be hoping for his or her party's success over the course of the next 20 years, take away from this man? You'll have to do a brief overview of how the GOP has conducted itself since January 20th in order to properly play the role (And I make this recommendation to actual Republicans as well as Democrats since the latter will actually be getting into character while the former have lately been prone to bouts of selective memory, denial, or both).

So, that's a big assignment. Frum then Rogoff. Report back here with your conclusions. ~ JDJ

You Just Have to Watch It

2009-03-13T15:52:00.000-07:00

You just really, really do. Here's part one.

The Daily Show With Jon StewartM - Th 11p / 10c

Jim Cramer Unedited Interview Pt. 1

Daily Show Full Episodes
Important Things w/ Demetri Martin

Political Humor
Jim Cramer

Here's part two.

The Daily Show With Jon StewartM - Th 11p / 10c

Jim Cramer Unedited Interview Pt. 2

Daily Show Full Episodes
Important Things w/ Demetri Martin

Political Humor
Jim Cramer

The Future For Newspapers Is Here?

2009-03-12T04:18:00.000-07:00

It's sobering to me that the Tribune Company is bankrupt and the Sun Times is on the auction block without a willing buyer.

I Like Russ . . . . But He's Wrong on This One

2009-03-10T09:22:00.000-07:00

Senator Feingold is behaving like a teacher who gives the whole class a detention because one student was naughty.

Here's his argument.

Here's mine.

Sorry . . . but Dr. Levinson makes it pretty clear that Senator Feingold's heart is in the right place, but the outcome (if his proposal actually ended up in the Constitution) would be potentially crippling to our democracy (ironically).

Don't diminish our national security because of Blago. That would be a genuine tragedy if ever there was one.

The Information Revolution is a Failure

2009-03-09T20:13:00.000-07:00

Don't we just throw in the towel and admit that blogs, talk radio, cable news . . . all make us more stupid than we clearly already are?

Jon Stewart offers a nice reminder that you're a dumbass. It's OK, I am too.

The dumbassedness is ubiquitous. Whiskey for my dumbass men, and beer for my dumbass horses. Dumbasses all, we trundle off into the NYSE-heading-under-6,000 night.

This is what we deserve . . . for we are dumbasses.

By the way, if you're of the opinion that you're not a dumbass, I'd like to hear from you . . . because I'm pretty sure you are (a dumbass) which, again, is absolutely and totally fine since I'm one too.

Robert Johnson Brings Us to the Crossroads

2009-03-01T05:24:00.000-08:00

No, not that Robert Johnson . . . this Robert Johnson, the one who's asking us to adopt some real post-partisan language (known these days as, I'm sorry Republicans, Obama Administration language) and take the road we need to travel with the American banking system.

Serious question: Is all this shunning of 'nationalization' talk from the Obama people just a 21st century fireside chat designed to delay what they already know to be the inevitable? Is nationalization (restructuring, in Johnson-speak), ironically, the genuine incarnation of capitalism? Put another way, is all this talk of avoiding nationalization (restructuring) an actual bend toward socialism's back door? Because, you know, if that's the actual case, then the GOP is going to need a drink.

As per the theme of a number of my posts, the GOP has (still) only operated in a way that makes me suspect their generational doom. My nephew turns two on Saturday. I'm beginning to wonder what will come first: His high school graduation or an actual White House contender who's a Republican.

Now . . . Let's Actually Talk About It

2009-02-21T06:44:00.000-08:00

OK, now that we've all had some fun with it, let's move on to the real conversation, the one that's genuinely sophisticated, about the Santelli Tea Party rant.

This is good . . . and serves as an excellent bookend for the discussion Mr. Santelli so aggressively brought to the table. I put it on my "highly recommended" list.

By any other measure of economic history (assuming we could conveniently remove the years 1929 through 1941) we're either already in or about to fall fully into . . . an economic depression.

Of course, no one would dare say this in the mainstream press . . . for reasons that are more than justifiable if not outright obvious . . . but that doesn't mean we can't talk about it here. Burt Reynolds said in the amazing movie Deliverance, "Sometimes you have to lose yourself before you can find anything." I couldn't agree more. The information revolution is responsible for a lot of pathetic content being churned out every second of every day (put me down on the 'guilty as charged' list, please) . . . but it's also responsible for providing a platform of fully embraced, illusion free dialogue.

So here you go. Read the NY Times piece linked above, sit back, and know that . . .

We're in an economic depression. Mr. Santelli's rant speaks to a lot of people. All of this is understandable. Hell, he sort of speaks to me. If I may, I fashion myself to be in the group otherwise known as "the responsible ones," although I might not just be quite ready to adopt Mr. Santelli's language and refer to everyone in America who's in some mortgage trouble as a bunch of "losers."

It simply can't be enough to watch Mr. Santelli and scream "Hell yeah!" at your CNBC-blaring television. Being in an economic depression requires more of us all.

So let's actually talk about it. Dare we?

Because I Need to Laugh

2009-02-19T14:13:00.000-08:00

I really do . . . and this always does it. I may have posted it before. Pathetic? Guilty as charged (obviously)

This Is Profound

2009-02-17T18:50:00.000-08:00

If they made economic thriller movies, this would be the outline of the screenplay . . . except it's about the real world . . . the one we're living in right now.

Darn Good Question

2009-02-17T05:43:00.001-08:00

Slate does it again!

Michael Phelps is just the tip of the ice berg. What's to be done with the most photographed generation in U.S. history (aka, 12-25 year olds) when they don't have copy editors following them around to approve their every (sometimes stupid) decision?

It's a conversation we're going to have to have sooner or later.

I say . . . let's have it sooner.~JDJ

Roland Burris: Dumbass

2009-02-15T04:27:00.000-08:00

Oh my.

Oh my oh my.

What an idiot.

I'm left only to ask: Did he think we wouldn't find out?

The Time Has Come to Actually Do Your Own Thinking

2009-02-11T19:10:00.000-08:00

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."
~Aristotle

Secretary Geithner's a nerd. You don't need to listen to him for very long to figure this out.

On occasion, my students will see me out and about. Often times, they freak just a tad. I should be home reading the U.S. Constitution . . . again, right? That's all I do in my spare time.

This is how I feel about Tim Geithner, only I picture him with his head buried in a stack of monetary policy papers. If I saw him at The Cheesecake Factory, I'd do a "No way Mr. Secretary! You come here?" so fast you'd swear I had an algebra test to go study for.

So, I humbly ask you to consider the following (even though no one in mainstream media has yet to seriously discuss it): Secretary Geithner, Lawrence Summers, and the rest of the President's economy God squad purposefully put out a vague plan for how to rescue our nation's troubled banks. I assume you know the market tanked yesterday, ostensibly off the news that the Geithner Plan . . . had very little actual news in it.

It's all quite plausible. You could almost hear Wall St. utter a collective, "That's it?" once the whole deal was put on the table.

Again, what I'm suggesting is that the Obama people knew a vague plan would have this effect, and so then they went ahead and announced it anyway.

CNBC's financial pundit brass looked like they were going to light up some torches and take to the streets at one point. Brian Williams was careful to make sure they got plenty of national news face time to vent. CBS, ABC, even Jim Lehrer's team joined in the fun. Outrage was en fuego. "Miscalculation," as a word, would have made you rich if you owned the intellectual property rights to its use. No one had anything to say but the following: The plan was too vague, Wall St. got spooked, and boy oh boy . . . can you believe we're in the mid 7000's now?

Here's what they should have been discussing. Guys like Geithner and Summers have conversations which inevitably involve statements like, "You know, if we put out something this vague, no one's going to like it. In fact, I think it'll send the markets down, maybe by a lot." I don't know who would have said this. Let's just pretend it was Summers.

So then Geithner (looking up from a monetary policy paper) would have replied, "Well, we could be detailed. We could level with them about what we expect to be the case, the actual situation. We could, uhhh, you know, tell it like it is?"

Then Summers would jump up on his desk and go, "Oh Great Hammer of Thor! No! No, I say!"

In other words, they weighed the two: Be vague vs. Be detailed . . . . and went with the former. This is a little bit like the 'logic' (ahem) behind intelligent design, but here goes: What can we conclude from what we don't see (aka, a detailed plan for our banks)? Don't like that one? Try this: How does a dentist give you a good feeling when describing the full process involved in your upcoming root canal? How much up front detail do you really want?

Consider the possibility (since our 'liberal' media won't) that Tim Geithner and Lawrence Summers might be smart people who look a few moves down the chess board. Consider that the vague plan route was a calculated risk, a lesser of two evils, a veritable punt . . . to the other side of their announced 'stress test' for American banks.

The stress test, one of the vague plan's few areas of clarity, is effectively going to amount to a full blown audit of the banks, ALL the banks, including the major leaguers like Wells Fargo, CITI, JP Morgan Chase, etc. Some of these guys behaved in a way that ought to rescind permanently the use of the word 'deregulation' unless assurances are given that there will still be a reasonable level of regulation on the way to attaching the "de" prefix. [NOTE to free market purists: I really used to be one of you. But if NINA loans can happen . . . No Income No Assets . . . then you need to rethink your views of government intrusion into market efficiencies if you're of the belief that government should be kept as far away as possible. NINA loans are efficient. I'll give you that. Know what else is efficient? A Luger discharged at the base of the skull. Word up: Efficiency for the sake of efficiency can lead to a closed casket. I'm being metaphorical, of course.]

The stress test portion of the Geithner Plan is in play because, deep down, we all probably know the jig is up. It's time to face the music. The stress test is indeed a full blown audit . . . of major leaguers . . . several of whom are . . . .

. . . insolvent.

That word deserves its own line. Do a 'one Mississippi, two Mississippi' . . . all the way up to ten. And think about the reality of a major banking system being insolvent for each and every Mississippi you utter. The time has come to actually think, people. Think beyond the CNBC outrage. Think about the odds of Geithner and Summers actually forgetting to include details in their plan? Really? You believe that? I don't think you do.

And again, think about several major banks in this country being . . .

. . . . insolvent.

I'm back to the same old theme now. If we don't start to change our reflex approach to everything under the identity politics umbrella then we deserve to become the big, fat version of Great Britain (aka, former power) we'll surely become.

What's happening right now is, unless you're my 92 year old grandmother, the most profoundly serious economic crisis you've ever seen in your lifetime. The reality of what confronts us is, to be frank, beyond what most of us are capable of digesting. Jack Nicholson said it best, "You can't handle the truth."

Think real hard before you disagree with me and say something like, "I can handle it! Let me have it!" You remind me of the kid in 'Searching for Bobby Fischer,' staring sternly at the chess board when, all of a sudden, the prodigy character offers him a draw with an extended hand. The kid refuses the gesture leaving the frustrated prodigy to simply say, "You've lost. You just don't know it."

GOP obstructionists adhering to nothing more than party-line rhetoric, shortsighted and reactionary media pundits neglecting to discuss what's being dealt with in this really pathetic blog post here . . . they ALL remind me of a bunch of naive English aristocrats heading off to Verdun in WWI.

They've lost. They just don't know it. They have no idea what we're all about to get into here.

They're stuck in an old model of partisan thinking . . . an old model of news analysis.

They're stuck in a pre-2009 mode of language.

They are, essentially, the unenlightened ones.

From James Carville to Karl Rove . . . from Bill O'Reilly to Keith Olbermann . . . and all of you who wittingly or unwittingly have learned your language from the political culture that's been shaped as a result . . . start speaking Sanskrit.

I'm serious.

Start speaking Sanskrit . . . or Latin . . . the dead language of your choice. I don't care. It'll work about as well, be just about as effective . . . as the tired words you spew or the tired news analysis you repeat.

The time has come to learn a new language. Quit your political party. Abandon your liberal or conservative or moderate label. Untangle yourself from the wreckage of a dead language which wraps itself tightly around identity politics.

The time has come to actually do your own thinking.

The Obama Press Conference Was Calculated Genius

2009-02-09T17:29:00.000-08:00

He's not as polished as when he's giving a speech.

Sure.

Granted.

I agree.

But the stilted, often hesitatnt nature of his speaking style in a press conference scenario is intentional. He turns it on and off. It makes him look more deliberative, like an intellectual.

Remember intellectuals?

Here's the bottom line: Seven minutes into the press conference he attached all GOP hesitancy on the stimulus plan to the wing-nut section of the party's economic philosophy that beleives the New Deal was wrong. So if you're in the GOP and you don't like the stimulus bill, you're de facto an extremist who believes that Hoover was right.

Congratulations.

And by the way, it doesn't have to be fair.

I predict the conference committee will replace about 50% of the cuts to states and the bill will sail (still with predominant GOP opposition, but choreographed to give the appearance of being against it while making sure the Senate filibuster remains staunchly clotured).

If you think he did poorly in this press conference, you need to keep up. This is chess, not checkers. I'm putting this post up while he's still taking questions.

The substance . . . the purpose of this night . . . has already been achieved. What I'm watching now is gravy. (The point was to make Republicans look insane. These are dangerous words to attach to a President but I'll do it anyway: Mission accomplished)

The GOP Will Not Ruin My Birthday

2009-02-07T05:02:00.000-08:00

Look, I'm a public school teacher who lives in a state that has debt issues. If you can't figure out why the GOP's dice-shave of the stimulus bill has me upset, then you need to read more. And remember, we can blame the GOP . . . and only the GOP . . . because this is the non-filibuster-proof Senate we're talking about here. [And, for the record, we're all about to get a lesson in civics because there's going to be something known as a conference committee that has to happen now. Conference committee's are largely benign gatherings of House members and Senators where differences between the respective versions of the bill get worked out. The President can only sign something that's been passed in identical form by both chambers. The conference committee on this particular stimulus bill may not be a benign affair, though. There are numerous House members . . . even some Republicans . . . who are feeling the heat at home to help take pressure off the strained state budget shortfalls. AIG gets a couple hundred billion dollars . . . but my kid Billy has to sit in a freshman algebra class of 50 students next year because you wouldn't kick us a couple billion over here in Indiana? The election of 2010 is only 21 months away . . . or, in terms more salient to the topic, when Billy will be in a sophomore geometry class of 55 students).

But let's not talk about that. Let's talk about what I've been talking about for the past few weeks.

This is it, right here . . . right now. This is where the GOP lays the foundation for its own irrelevance in the next 15 years. Thanks to my good pal, MS, I've already seen the "overnights" on this (Best birthday present so far, dude) . . . and the American public has spanked President Obama down to a horrifying approval rating of 68% (sarcastic tone intended) NOT for the reasons being rattled off by Mitch McConnell.

Quite the contrary, the President's wrists are being lightly slapped because he's not telling Mitch McConnell to f### off. Numbers don't lie. I'm not trying to be a pathetic know it all. They're internals, so I won't share without permission (which I won't get) . . . . but they're pretty clear. The American people are telling the President to be LESS nice to the GOP. Why is that? If you're a member of the GOP, take a good long hard look in the mirror (I asked you to do this a couple weeks ago in an earlier post). Clinton moved the Democrats to the right. Who's your Clinton? Time for many of you to pack your bags and prep for a move to the left. The train whistle's only going to blow a couple more times.

Barack Obama knows all this. Mitch McConnell knows that Barack Obama knows all this. Barack Obama knows that Mitch McConnell knows that Barack Obama knows all this.

Mitch McConnell's actually a smart guy who's in the Senate by the skin of his electoral teeth (November 4th was engaging on many levels, but the one that we probably should have given more attention, once we knew the McCain people were doomed, was just how close Senator McConnell came to being unemployed as opposed to being the de facto head of his party . . . which is what he is right now, try as Minority Leader Boehner might).

So I'm mad, but this isn't over for me. I'm going to be OK. I don't belong to either party (although the GOP is making it easier and easier for me to say something like, "Awww hell, sure. I'll just say I'm a Democrat for the time being.")

It's not over for me, but if you DO BELONG to the GOP, and you DO ENDORSE their most recent behavior regarding the stimulus bill . . . then listen to me (because I listen to MS, the guru who made lots of my friends mad when he declared that Bush had lost the general public on the night he made his post-Katrina speech from The Big Easy. We took tons of grief from lots and lots of Bush apologists, and even a few Democrats. Only problem is this: MS was right. Look back on it now. Joystick polling worked! I'm wondering if he's received a single apology. I doubt it) . . . it's about to be over for you.

Sorry. The truth hurts. And again, I don't enjoy being the messenger. I want a viable GOP. Jerry McGuire said it best, "Help me help you." Cut loose of the silly semantics Senator McConnell. Barack Obama doesn't have copyright protection on the word 'Change.'

Do it for me. It's my birthday.

Loyalty to the Cause

2009-02-05T04:39:00.000-08:00

I'm a Cubs fan. It's crazy . . . maybe even stupid . . . but it's also baseball . . . so who cares?

The GOP is NOT reading this blog, and they should. As I've written earlier, they're stuck in old white man mode (irrespective of their new party chairman).

And now we see with their reaction to the President's stimulus bill, they're stuck in another era in terms of how they choose to argue against it. That train has already left the station. It doesn't matter if they're right or wrong, the public has already moved past their rhetoric.

This doesn't end well for them. That's what I've been saying. And if the GOP loses its viability, then we all suffer.

So how do we talk to them (the GOP illuminati) so they hear us? How do we get through? Anyone know how to do an intervention with an entire major party?

Nothing is for Free in this World

2009-02-04T11:00:00.000-08:00

I believe the saying [mentioned as this post's title] is derived from a fiscally and socially conservative ideology, is it not? Consider, please, that the President's most recent action is just that, an act of fiscal and social conservatism.

If you say no to this claim then might I suggest to you that you're changing the meaning of the words to suit your own purposes. Fiscal and social conservatives stopped acting like fiscal and social conservatives a while back, but they insisted upon keeping the brand name . . . which is now less and less possible in the midst of a truly post-partisan effort to govern. What Obama has done is reintroduced the notion of fiscal and social conservatism with a single declaration available to him as chief executive officer of the U.S. Government.

It's just what we were taught growing up, right? You have to work for your money. You have to meet a standard of success in what you do if you wish to survive in the workplace. Just showing up to work shouldn't guarantee you a thing. You have to abide by standards of taxpayer will if you're going to effectively be a taxpayer supported institution.

I'm a public school teacher. I hear it all the time. I also happen to agree with it. I'm just tickled that the upper echelons of America's bailed out corporate executive class are now joining me.

Happy to have you all on board!

Just calling it like I see it~JDJ

Get HULU'd

2009-02-03T04:47:00.000-08:00

If you haven't gotten bit by the bug yet, here you go. (It's been around for a while, but I'm finding a lot of people my age don't know of it yet)

More on the Steele GOP

2009-02-01T18:15:00.000-08:00

Salon has chimed in.

When in the present, it's best to stay there and focus (which is why I posted what I posted a little while ago).

Failure to adapt will ultimately spell a failure to matter. Again, we've seen it before. It's up to the GOP to make sure it doesn't happen again.

25 Things You Don't Know About Me

2009-02-01T05:07:00.001-08:00

Facebook started this trend (or, maybe, someone on Facebook started this trend) . . . so I decided to jump in. Here are my 25 things you don't know about me:

1--The line, "Beirut rules, Mr. Baer?" from the movie Syriana was inspired by an intense conversation I had with Stephen Gaghan at a Dennys in Louisville in 1992. He wrote it into the movie as a tribute to that discussion (and, by extension, what I contributed to his awakening)

2--Loki's time with me in Cristal Atoll back in the 80's was magical, yes. But profound? Sadly, no. Never leave real thinking to someone who's spent his or her time in college abroad for more than a year. It's corrupting to the personal constitution.

3--I was a champion equestrian barrier designer at age 13 but was pulled away from it by overly helicopterish parents who felt it wasn't appropriately stiumulating to all 7 of my intelligences (wherein I retain 'gifted' status across the board).

4--I still draw royalties off the intellectual property rights to an algorithm I developed which determines a 0.01% margin of error ratio of "people persons" to "loners" that exist in the world. Look out loners! The trends are NOT working in your favor.

5--My wife doesn't know this so don't tell her. I'm actually married to three other women and one man at present. They all live in the continental United States which means I ran out of time zones when Delsia and I got hitched last August (20% of my heart belongs to you, Little D!)

6--Regarding #5, the Homeland Security Act of 2002 includes provisions that have actually made it EASIER to manage the various drivers licenses and passports needed to be a credible (aka, uncaught) polygamist. All of this stands, once again, as an ironic twist on the evident: We've spent literally a trillion dollars in the past 7 years to make this country safer . . . and have achieved the opposite. Lucky for everyone (especially the residents of Gitmo, upon whom a school-cafeteria-sized can of whoop ass would have been opened had I arrived) I'm a Patriot and not a terrorist, right?

7--Regarding #6, contrary to what you may have heard or read in "The New Yorker," I was never in Kandahar, Afghanistan in the mid 90's. Kandahar, Wyoming? Uhhhhh, let's move on to #8, shall we?

8--I possess evidence that the voices on Patrick Fitzgerald's most recently famous batch of tapes ARE NOT those of unfairly discarded former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich. It'll all be in the book. This one was a request of my agent. Here endeth the teaser. Stay tuned (Like you wouldn't?)

9--I am a blood relative (Great, great, great Aunt) of the head choreographer of the Moulin Rouge from 1909 until the start of the Great War when she started seeing a little known French Officer known as Charles DeGaulle (I'm not lying).

10--I studied ballet with Rahm Emmanuel before we both took different paths. We still talk every week. Last week, he called twice. The dance . . . or, these days, simply taking a little time for refuge in the sanctuary known otherwise as 'Pleasant reminiscing about the dance' is one of the few things that makes life worth the hassle for the two of us. I shall always be J-Dawg to your Rahm-man Noodle, Mr. Chief of Staff.

11--Maureen Dowd and I still "visit" when the itch is there, but I've lately been avoiding it since Krugman's Nobel Prize inclined her to invite him to said visits. I believe the word is spelled C-R-E-E-P-Y [NOTE: Could we also keep this one on the D-L from my five spouses?]

12--I went LLC last year with a business plan that seeks to fill the snob gap in the GOP. We're kicking ass and taking names on the 'French wine and expensive cheeses' front. These people had no idea. Really, it's like watching a bunch of 19 years olds listen to the Grateful Dead for the first time, all nodding, saying things like, "Yeah, it really HAS been a long, strange trip!" Next month we unveil Palin Moose Liver Pate'

13--I trim my chest hair

14--I trim my ear hair

15--The line, "If you love something, set it free," was first used by my freshman year dorm roommate's great grandfather when he hung out with F. Scott Fitzgerald during his brief, but rarely chronicled, time in Quebec

16--All guest speakers in my classes from 1989 until it became illegal for me to do so (October 14, 1997) had to sign over to me the right to personally profit from the stories they told when in my classroom. Watch "Stand and Deliver" starting at approximately the 53 minute mark. Stay with it until just past the 57 minute mark. That was all based on me.

17--Two pieces of furniture in my home are gifts from the late Jim Williams, he of 'Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil' fame. I was part of an amalgam of characters used to inspire the now famous line, "hurricane of sex."

18--I won 5 state championships in track and cross country while in high school. But if you really know me, then you know it should have been 7 (800 meter run in the 10th grade and cross country in the 11th grade).

19--I am a registered "Pilot Savant" with the FAA. Simply put, this means I'm capable of flying any aircraft, commercial or otherwise, irrespective of personal deficiencies in cockpit hours (Side Note to Adam: NO, I once again WILL NOT use my summer vacation to catch up! I did not become a certified teacher to work in the month of July). Like someone who can play music by ear, once you sit me down in the cockpit and put me in front of the controls, it all just sort of "makes sense.". I've never technically had a flying lesson.

20--Regarding #19, the ERS (Evasive Response Strategy) employed by the pilot who safely put flight 1549 down on the Hudson River is a direct result of a memo I sent to the FAA in 2003. It's at their website. Look it up.

21--Lately, as the early 40's give way to the mid-40's, I've also had to start trimming out of control eyebrows . . . . which, except for that one misunderstanding with Paul Krugman (see #11), have been mine.

22--I was a busboy at the IOC planning session (in Zurich in 1996) where the name "Half Pipe" was made official for the ski event we've now all come to love and cherish, perhaps more than the Super Bowl and World Series combined. So I'm here to tell you that the rumors are true. The name of the event WAS NOT inspired by the shape of the ski run. I've never removed more empty bags of Cool Ranch Doritos from tables in my life.

23--The infamous Puck character from one of the early seasons of MTV's 'The Real World' only got his spot after it was determined that I would be unable to secure a leave of absence at my job

24--I haven't had a drink in over 16 years. I think people who drink alcohol are all going to hell.

25--I was the first person in North America to notice that 'Evian' spelled backwards is 'Naive'.

Wellllllllllllllllllll, look at what the GOP went and did!

2009-01-31T14:46:00.000-08:00

Michael Steele is the new RNC Chairman.

Didn't someone say something about this a while back?

Sorry, I'm . . . . working on the modesty thing.

How I Benefit Personally from Governor Blagojevich's Removal from Office

2009-01-30T10:26:00.000-08:00

I grew up 12 miles from Pontiac, Illinois, whose economy is largely tethered to the maximum security prison that sits there.

One of the most pathetic aspects of blogging is when people get too personal . . . . so, to avoid this, let's just say that the better Pontiac does, the better I do. ~JDJ

PS--I still believe that the former Governor of Illinois would have done best for himself to allow the former Miss Teen USA contestant from South Carolina to represent him on the State Senate floor.

The Death of Talk Radio Cometh

2009-01-27T23:45:00.000-08:00

Leonard Pitts says it much better than I'm capable of saying it, but mark my words: Prediction #16 will be correct come December 31, 2009.

It's already happened in many ways. The decoupling between what Rush says and what we think began round about September 15th of this past year (and it's picked up steam ever since).

You can check it against any number of polls, the place on the political spectrum where you'll find this trend is more true than ever is most definitely right of center. The left rarely if ever gave credence to Cape Girardeau's favorite son; thus, any digging you do with those people won't reveal much of a shift.

The phone call is coming from inside the house, Mr. Limbaugh!

Indeed, talk radio in general is moving to relic status. Its ability to influence actual political realities is simply ending. What's worse, it has only one option as per the preordained terms of its market. There's no better bellweather of this industry than Rush Limbaugh. He's the King. The only move he can make to try and stop his own 'relevance bleeding' is to introduce more and more hyperbole to the product he sells. More and more hyperbole ensures only that he'll become less and less relevant . . . which leads him to again exercise his only option of bringing on more and more hyperbole . . . and so on . . . and so on.

It's a downward spiral of a different sort, to be sure, but nothing that should surprise us. The history of media suggests that these types of trends do ultimately end . . . and by "end" I'm hardly referring to profits. Please do be sure to read the full prediction on #16. I'm not claiming a loss of listeners. Quite the opposite, in fact: Talk radio will do better than it's ever done before in terms of ratings--and that will actually be its problem.

Judge Judy is damn entertaining . . . but no one I'd look to for an understanding of our legal system.~JDJ

Losing a Literary Giant

2009-01-27T13:14:00.000-08:00

John Updike

R.I.P.

Let's Make it 21!

2009-01-27T11:26:00.000-08:00

Sorry to be all Alumni-ish on you lately, but I just really am enjoying being this good and having no one really know about it. We're #19? Ummmm, I really do think you're still undervaluing our product.

Recession Proof Cloud Computing . . . and Just Change in General

2009-01-26T04:28:00.000-08:00

A Really Pathetic aspect of many blogs is to simply say, "Hey, I found this mind-boggling article that you all should read."

Why do we still have televisions?

Are There Really Two Sides to Every Issue?

2009-01-25T05:04:00.001-08:00

So, I was talking with a friend the other day about the concept of legacy in Presidential politics. That somehow got turned into a discussion over the idea of balance in political discourse (Hint: Both MSNBC and FOX News came into the conversation----NOTE: If you rely on either for your primary news, you're being played like a fool. And if your solution is to watch both, then you're just being silly. Now, if you're watching one or both for entertainment . . . and you KNOW that's the reason why you're watching . . . then I think I sort of like you).

Watch this.

The point of that scene is to deny the existence of the hackneyed cliche, "There are two sides to every issue."

There aren't.

Know of any issues that would fit this criteria? Share please. Give us an issue (or set of issues) that have, for all practical purposes, one side. When we see the "other side" being brought into mainstream media or a personal conversation, they (the media and/or the conversants) are entertaining us . . . giving the appearance of being fair . . . but not being realistic (in any reasonable sense of the word).

Good stuff

2009-01-25T04:51:00.001-08:00

Always warms my heart.

WARNING: This is addicting

2009-01-23T09:28:00.001-08:00

Check this out.

Here's the Really Pathetic Poll: Which one do you like the most? The least?

I'll get things started in the comments section.~JDJ

The GOP in White and Black

2009-01-21T06:28:00.000-08:00

This post comes on the first full day of the Barack Hussein Obama Administration. Consider it an open letter to his political rivals.

In 1948 retired General Dwight D. Eisenhower was asked about the possibility of running for public office. His response revealed the efficiency you'd expect of someone who planned Operation Overlord, "I just don't believe military men should get involved in politics."

OK, then. That was that. Or so the nation thought.

Except, as we know, Eisenhower was elected President of the United States just four years later. Today, we'd hear an answer like the one he gave and chalk it up to the game: Deny ambition for office as a first step toward pursuing it. Except, if you really study the man in this particular case, you come to realize that he was probably telling the truth. Four years before taking the biggest job in the world he was of the belief that it would have been inappropriate to go after it.

What changed his mind? The Republican Party.

The GOP's brass came into the General's home and dealt with him on his own terms, straight up. Eisenhower was asked to save the nation a second time. If the Democrats won a sixth straight term to the Oval Office, the two party system in America would likely buckle (they contended). What would be left of the democratic process was anyone's guess. Maybe a new party would form, maybe we'd see a fluid stream of coalitions efforting a challenge to the Democratic Party hegemons. Who knew? Uncertainty reigned. An Eisenhower candidacy would deliver stability to a tenuous system that had grown addicted to a political party duopoly.

The pitch worked. Depending on which story you choose to believe, it took Eisenhower anywhere from an hour to a day to agree. The rest is history.

At that moment, the Republican Party was probably at a high point in terms of its national appeal (Reagan in 1984 competes quite nicely, though). Eisenhower energized the base, but, more importantly, brought the Republican brand to corners of the country that hadn't considered it for a long time. We spend a lot of academic and pundit-ish energy lauding over Nixon's Southern Strategy as a transformative moment for the GOP. We put far less focus than we should on Eisenhower's comprehensive appeal. Nixon may have changed the rules for his party's foundation, but Eisenhower effectively wrote the original draft of those new rules for post-War America. In simplest terms, without Ike, Nixon wouldn't have had a strategy to execute.

The idea of nationalizing a party's brand without a unifying crisis like the Great Depression or the biggest war in the history of humanity wasn't really even in the playbook back in 1952. Few campaign operatives considered it as a priority-one strategy. America's two party system had, up until Eisenhower, largely been a reflection of regional politics. Lincoln didn't even bother to campaign in the South in 1860. The Republican Party was a genuine regional party whose epicenter was squarely in the North. A half century and one monumentally bad electoral cycle later, it's effectively a regional party of the South.

And it's in trouble. (And if you're a fan of democracy, even if you're a Democrat, this should bother you).

The current geographic trajectory of Eisenhower's resurrection handiwork will have a new epicenter in the Gulf of Mexico or, if they're lucky, Tijuana . . . by next week. These aren't bad destinations (provided you have a boat for that first one), but they'll be problematic on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November during even numbered years.

The issue this time is far more complicated than it was in 1952. We're talking about a challenge that's organic and quite likely beyond the day-saving capacity of a war hero. In simple terms, the GOP is not diverse at precisely the time in America's history when diversity is to party viability like jet fuel is to a 747.

What's to be done? That's easy. The GOP needs to . . . get diverse.

How? Don't ask me. But take the advice, Republicans. You need to get diverse. And you need to do it yesterday.

Get diverse, or, regardless of what Newsmax says . . .

. . . it will be over . . . and that scares me more than a "Palin 2012" yard sign.

The Democratic Party got schooled like a bunch of skateboarders trying to run a mile in gym class back in the 1980's. America had shifted right underneath them and they had no clue until it was too late. History may very well judge that it took a quarter century to fully recover from that Reagan tsunami . . . but oh how the Democrats HAVE INDEED recovered. Would anyone wanting to be taken seriously dare question the death spiral of the GOP after reviewing the numbers from 2006 and 2008? The convenient answer (if you're a Republican and want to sleep at night) is to just blame it all on now former President George W. Bush. The 'take a good long hard look in the mirror and reach for a Lunesta' answer is much worse, though. America has shifted again, but in a more profound manner than what we saw in 1980.

This is where a lot of Democrats I know get smug. Some of it's understandable. I'm of the group who believes President Obama was referring to several things at once when he said, "It's been a long time coming," last November 4th. So everyone needs to grant a little chest-beating 'boo-yah' endzone dancing, but it should stop there. If the smugness lasts much past Valentine's Day then it's time to get worried. Now, this would be where you'd expect me to write something like, 'If the Democrats get all full of themselves then they'll get beaten up by the electorate in 2010.'
I wish that's the point I was trying to make. What I fear is worse: The Democratic Party might be heading into another era of being bullet proof, just like 1932-1952, whether it's smug or not.

This wouldn't be a good thing.

When I started reading words like "permanent Republican majority" back in the Rove Era, I got scared. The words 'permanent' and 'majority' have no business being together if you also hope to use the words 'healthy' and 'republic.' We should cheer for a two party system.

And that's where the GOP needs to answer the wake up call. Here we are, January of 2009, and one of our two major parties is based almost exclusively in the South with ever-dwindling fuel levels in the rest of the nation. Save for two Bush Administration Secretaries of State, they have no national figure minorities to speak of. They're a party whose face is principally a bunch of white men with a few token white women; moreover, they appear to be completely unwilling to listen to the alarm bell that's ringing. Why Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal isn't constantly having rose petals thrown in front of his anticipated path by Mike Duncan is beyond me.

So here's a reading assignment. But before you start, buck up, especially if you're a Republican. It's heady stuff that will actually require you to abandon the notion that anything complex is de facto liberal blather. That approach to life has worked well for mediums like talk radio for a good decade now, but (as I predict in number sixteen) the game is changing. You have to throw this simplistic script in the trash and start over . . . in more ways than you can probably imagine. Getting through Hua Hsu's piece without punching your computer screen will be a nice start. And if you're a Democrat, the first temptation will be to take a long nap because . . . why bother?

You're set, right?

Unfortunately, the answer just might be . . . maybe.

Being a registered independent is freedom to write what you want and feel pretty damn good about it when you do. So let me be clear, I'm cheering for the Republicans on this one. All hands on deck, white boys. All the lifeboats are gone. You need to patch the hull or go down with the ship. Might I recommend tooting your horn toward the S.S. People of Color? But be advised, you're going to need to make some changes.

Former President George W. Bush in Midland

2009-01-20T18:03:00.000-08:00

There's some good stuff here. It's worth a view.

I Didn't Want to Say Anything At the Time

2009-01-20T14:58:00.000-08:00

I watched the oath of office with a room full of people who were, save for a couple of colleagues who stopped by, younger than Malia Obama the last time we had a day like today (an inauguration that was a full transfer of power) . . . . so I bit my tongue when I saw and heard what I thought I saw and heard.

"No," I thought, "Must be some older version, tried and true, adapted from the mid-1800's or something. Who says we have to go verbatim off the Constitution? I'm witnessing a throwback gesture. Maybe this was Lincoln's oath."

But something about President Obama's face (the smile in particular) and the body language suggested otherwise.

Turns out I was right. The Oath of Office got a little mussed up today.

And, for those who would ask (as several of my students did after class), the answer is no, you can't use this technicality to argue that Barack Obama isn't the President of the United States. The Oath is required by the Constitution, but his Presidency began at Noon, or about 7 minutes before John Roberts, Jr. butchered his lines. For that matter, President Obama got the launch codes at 10 AM, a full two hours earlier (A thought that doesn't at all remind me of the day when I first started at Shorewood High School and they gave me . . . classroom keys).

Incidentally, what you saw today between President Obama and Chief Justice Roberts was historic in another way (other than the cue-card-less version of the Oath submitted for our disapproval). It was the first time that a President took an Oath of Office from a Chief Justice whose nomination the President formally rejected. President Obama is the first person to be elected to his office from the U.S. Senate since John F. Kennedy (who was sworn in by Earl Warren who was Senatorially approved to the High Court when Kennedy was just a Congressman from Massachusetts). Senator Barack Obama voted against the nomination of John Roberts, Jr. That's a first in U.S. history.

Then It's Not a Bad Idea to Watch It Again

2009-01-20T13:25:00.000-08:00

I'm looking toward an outcome, and it's the one where we deeply think about what was said.

That's it. I swear. It's an agenda-less ambition.

The Speech is Worth Reading

2009-01-20T10:19:00.000-08:00

You may have watched it. I recommend you read it.~JDJ

Following is the prepared text of President-elect Barack Obama’s Inaugural Address, as provided by the Presidential Inaugural Committee:

My fellow citizens:

I stand here today humbled by the task before us, grateful for the trust you have bestowed, mindful of the sacrifices borne by our ancestors. I thank President Bush for his service to our nation, as well as the generosity and cooperation he has shown throughout this transition.

Forty-four Americans have now taken the presidential oath. The words have been spoken during rising tides of prosperity and the still waters of peace. Yet, every so often the oath is taken amidst gathering clouds and raging storms. At these moments, America has carried on not simply because of the skill or vision of those in high office, but because We the People have remained faithful to the ideals of our forbearers, and true to our founding documents.

So it has been. So it must be with this generation of Americans.

That we are in the midst of crisis is now well understood. Our nation is at war, against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred. Our economy is badly weakened, a consequence of greed and irresponsibility on the part of some, but also our collective failure to make hard choices and prepare the nation for a new age. Homes have been lost; jobs shed; businesses shuttered. Our health care is too costly; our schools fail too many; and each day brings further evidence that the ways we use energy strengthen our adversaries and threaten our planet.

These are the indicators of crisis, subject to data and statistics. Less measurable but no less profound is a sapping of confidence across our land - a nagging fear that America’s decline is inevitable, and that the next generation must lower its sights.

Today I say to you that the challenges we face are real. They are serious and they are many. They will not be met easily or in a short span of time. But know this, America - they will be met.
On this day, we gather because we have chosen hope over fear, unity of purpose over conflict and discord.

On this day, we come to proclaim an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn out dogmas, that for far too long have strangled our politics.

We remain a young nation, but in the words of Scripture, the time has come to set aside childish things. The time has come to reaffirm our enduring spirit; to choose our better history; to carry forward that precious gift, that noble idea, passed on from generation to generation: the God-given promise that all are equal, all are free, and all deserve a chance to pursue their full measure of happiness.

In reaffirming the greatness of our nation, we understand that greatness is never a given. It must be earned. Our journey has never been one of short-cuts or settling for less. It has not been the path for the faint-hearted - for those who prefer leisure over work, or seek only the pleasures of riches and fame. Rather, it has been the risk-takers, the doers, the makers of things - some celebrated but more often men and women obscure in their labor, who have carried us up the long, rugged path towards prosperity and freedom.

For us, they packed up their few worldly possessions and traveled across oceans in search of a new life.

For us, they toiled in sweatshops and settled the West; endured the lash of the whip and plowed the hard earth.

For us, they fought and died, in places like Concord and Gettysburg; Normandy and Khe Sanh.

Time and again these men and women struggled and sacrificed and worked till their hands were raw so that we might live a better life. They saw America as bigger than the sum of our individual ambitions; greater than all the differences of birth or wealth or faction.

This is the journey we continue today. We remain the most prosperous, powerful nation on Earth. Our workers are no less productive than when this crisis began. Our minds are no less inventive, our goods and services no less needed than they were last week or last month or last year. Our capacity remains undiminished. But our time of standing pat, of protecting narrow interests and putting off unpleasant decisions - that time has surely passed. Starting today, we must pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off, and begin again the work of remaking America.

For everywhere we look, there is work to be done. The state of the economy calls for action, bold and swift, and we will act - not only to create new jobs, but to lay a new foundation for growth.

We will build the roads and bridges, the electric grids and digital lines that feed our commerce and bind us together. We will restore science to its rightful place, and wield technology’s wonders to raise health care’s quality and lower its cost. We will harness the sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars and run our factories. And we will transform our schools and colleges and universities to meet the demands of a new age. All this we can do. And all this we will do.

Now, there are some who question the scale of our ambitions - who suggest that our system cannot tolerate too many big plans. Their memories are short. For they have forgotten what this country has already done; what free men and women can achieve when imagination is joined to common purpose, and necessity to courage.

What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them - that the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long no longer apply. The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works - whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified. Where the answer is yes, we intend to move forward. Where the answer is no, programs will end. And those of us who manage the public’s dollars will be held to account - to spend wisely, reform bad habits, and do our business in the light of day - because only then can we restore the vital trust between a people and their government.

Nor is the question before us whether the market is a force for good or ill. Its power to generate wealth and expand freedom is unmatched, but this crisis has reminded us that without a watchful eye, the market can spin out of control - and that a nation cannot prosper long when it favors only the prosperous. The success of our economy has always depended not just on the size of our Gross Domestic Product, but on the reach of our prosperity; on our ability to extend opportunity to every willing heart - not out of charity, but because it is the surest route to our common good.

As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals. Our Founding Fathers, faced with perils we can scarcely imagine, drafted a charter to assure the rule of law and the rights of man, a charter expanded by the blood of generations. Those ideals still light the world, and we will not give them up for expedience’s sake. And so to all other peoples and governments who are watching today, from the grandest capitals to the small village where my father was born: know that America is a friend of each nation and every man, woman, and child who seeks a future of peace and dignity, and that we are ready to lead once more.

Recall that earlier generations faced down fascism and communism not just with missiles and tanks, but with sturdy alliances and enduring convictions. They understood that our power alone cannot protect us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please. Instead, they knew that our power grows through its prudent use; our security emanates from the justness of our cause, the force of our example, the tempering qualities of humility and restraint.

We are the keepers of this legacy. Guided by these principles once more, we can meet those new threats that demand even greater effort - even greater cooperation and understanding between nations. We will begin to responsibly leave Iraq to its people, and forge a hard-earned peace in Afghanistan. With old friends and former foes, we will work tirelessly to lessen the nuclear threat, and roll back the specter of a warming planet. We will not apologize for our way of life, nor will we waver in its defense, and for those who seek to advance their aims by inducing terror and slaughtering innocents, we say to you now that our spirit is stronger and cannot be broken; you cannot outlast us, and we will defeat you.

For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus - and non-believers. We are shaped by every language and culture, drawn from every end of this Earth; and because we have tasted the bitter swill of civil war and segregation, and emerged from that dark chapter stronger and more united, we cannot help but believe that the old hatreds shall someday pass; that the lines of tribe shall soon dissolve; that as the world grows smaller, our common humanity shall reveal itself; and that America must play its role in ushering in a new era of peace.

To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect. To those leaders around the globe who seek to sow conflict, or blame their society’s ills on the West - know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy. To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history; but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist.

To the people of poor nations, we pledge to work alongside you to make your farms flourish and let clean waters flow; to nourish starved bodies and feed hungry minds. And to those nations like ours that enjoy relative plenty, we say we can no longer afford indifference to suffering outside our borders; nor can we consume the world’s resources without regard to effect. For the world has changed, and we must change with it.

As we consider the road that unfolds before us, we remember with humble gratitude those brave Americans who, at this very hour, patrol far-off deserts and distant mountains. They have something to tell us today, just as the fallen heroes who lie in Arlington whisper through the ages. We honor them not only because they are guardians of our liberty, but because they embody the spirit of service; a willingness to find meaning in something greater than themselves. And yet, at this moment - a moment that will define a generation - it is precisely this spirit that must inhabit us all.

For as much as government can do and must do, it is ultimately the faith and determination of the American people upon which this nation relies. It is the kindness to take in a stranger when the levees break, the selflessness of workers who would rather cut their hours than see a friend lose their job which sees us through our darkest hours. It is the firefighter’s courage to storm a stairway filled with smoke, but also a parent’s willingness to nurture a child, that finally decides our fate.

Our challenges may be new. The instruments with which we meet them may be new. But those values upon which our success depends - hard work and honesty, courage and fair play, tolerance and curiosity, loyalty and patriotism - these things are old. These things are true. They have been the quiet force of progress throughout our history. What is demanded then is a return to these truths. What is required of us now is a new era of responsibility - a recognition, on the part of every American, that we have duties to ourselves, our nation, and the world, duties that we do not grudgingly accept but rather seize gladly, firm in the knowledge that there is nothing so satisfying to the spirit, so defining of our character, than giving our all to a difficult task.

This is the price and the promise of citizenship.

This is the source of our confidence - the knowledge that God calls on us to shape an uncertain destiny.

This is the meaning of our liberty and our creed - why men and women and children of every race and every faith can join in celebration across this magnificent mall, and why a man whose father less than sixty years ago might not have been served at a local restaurant can now stand before you to take a most sacred oath.

So let us mark this day with remembrance, of who we are and how far we have traveled. In the year of America’s birth, in the coldest of months, a small band of patriots huddled by dying campfires on the shores of an icy river. The capital was abandoned. The enemy was advancing. The snow was stained with blood. At a moment when the outcome of our revolution was most in doubt, the father of our nation ordered these words be read to the people:

"Let it be told to the future world...that in the depth of winter, when nothing but hope and virtue could survive...that the city and the country, alarmed at one common danger, came forth to meet [it]."

America. In the face of our common dangers, in this winter of our hardship, let us remember these timeless words. With hope and virtue, let us brave once more the icy currents, and endure what storms may come. Let it be said by our children’s children that when we were tested we refused to let this journey end, that we did not turn back nor did we falter; and with eyes fixed on the horizon and God’s grace upon us, we carried forth that great gift of freedom and delivered it safely to future generations.

Today is About Transition

2009-01-20T06:03:00.001-08:00

I always tell my students (typically when teaching the concept of habeas corpus) that the things we find boring (or the things we take for granted) count as the ultimate compliments given to this great nation. The fact that we simply assume there will be a handing off of power a little later today, sans tanks and guns and bombs and chaos, is an assumption we're entitled to make, but that doesn't make us special. Indeed, all of humanity is entitled to this same assumption. They simply don't get what they're entitled to. We do, and we rarely take a moment to reflect upon it because we're spoiled. We've relegated the whole consideration to the realm of the trivial.

The legacy of this nation is multifaceted, and way more than a blog post can muster. Suffice it to say, we're a complicated bunch, we Americans. But we never cease to amaze the world with our feline-nine-lives capacity for renewal. Today is about that, for sure.

But, more than anything else, it's about the peaceful transition of power. I'm biased. Sorry. Peaceful transition of power is the big #1 for me (and I'd of written this if McCain had won). My mentor of many years, Sonja Ivanovic, taught me to appreciate the moment and what it really meant.

Try this: Take a map of the world and throw a dart at it. Overcome the 70+% odds of hitting water (in other words, manage to hit a land mass) and I'll give you a coin toss chance that you'll land where peaceful transition of power is a remote notion at best.

Seriously, try it. See how you do. Then reflect on how lucky you are to be here.

I just did it. I hit Indonesia.

~JDJ

Tomorrow is about Today

2009-01-19T05:12:00.001-08:00

A good friend got me doing this years back. I'll try and pay it forward right here.

I read the great letter on this day. It's a personal tradition (which, again, was suggested to me by a friend who's been doing it his entire adult life).

Recognize the achievement of the man we honor today and I think there's a more refined perspective to be had regarding tomorrow. In past years, the word tomorrow was meant in the figurative sense. This particular year, it's also meant literally.

Peace~ JDJ

Goodness

2009-01-17T09:30:00.000-08:00

This is stunning.
(NOTE: Wait for it)

I Need the Following Two People to Have Large Egos

2009-01-16T04:56:00.001-08:00

1--My doctor (Most recently, my cardiologist)

2--Anyone flying the plane I'm on

C.B. Sullenberger, you are the man! Nicely done, sir.

The Coolest Al Franken Poster Ever

2009-01-15T01:15:00.000-08:00

Thanks to Special D for passing it on. You probably won't get it if you're under the age of 35.

Embrace the Moment (aka, the Horror)

2009-01-14T06:10:00.000-08:00

Steve Buscemi is a chronic scene stealer in the awesome flick, 'Armageddon.'

One of his great lines comes when they're on the asteroid and things aren't looking good: Broken drills, time running out, all sorts of strife between the civilians and the soldiers. Buscemi puts his arms in the air, literally faces earth, and says, "Guess what guys, it's time to embrace the horror! Look, we've got front row tickets to the end of the earth!"

Fortunately, in spite of his character's genius status, the suggestion is ignored, Bruce Willis blows himself up (along with the asteroid), Ben and Liv get back in the same bed, and we're all living happily ever after by the time the credits role (over creepy funeral footage of Owen Wilson, et al).

Today's New York Times might, if you were a crazy, gambling addicted genius, help you find your inner-Armageddon-Buscemi.

So here's the deal: This is the real world. The asteroid is whatever we're supposed to call the locked up credit market. Barack Obama is Billy Bob Thornton.

Who's Bruce Willis? Help me, because I'm starting to get a "wild hair" as they say, and I'm thinking that maybe it just might be time to go a little crazy.

We can't all live forever, right?

How Long Would You Do This Job?

2009-01-13T06:18:00.001-08:00

If you could get it, for how long would you be willing to do this?

Sign me up for a year, with an option to renew for two.

Then I'd be done.

OnStar Nation

2009-01-09T11:54:00.000-08:00

Here it is . . .

. . . the new ride.

Before I get a bunch of hate email, let me explain. It's a Chevy HHR (Which stands for 'Heritage High Roof,' basically a Honda Element in back and, I kid you not, a 1949 Chevy pickup truck in front). It gets 31 miles per gallon (Which I confirmed in a test drive). It's the only vehicle in our household (We're bus riders). It's a GM product (Don't blame me if #6 comes true). And it suits a lifestyle that ought to help keep your health insurance premiums lower (Two bikes fit nicely in the back when the rear seats are down).

I like it. My wife doesn't like it. She agreed to buy it without me having to do any Jedi mind tricking. We've decided to stay married. How I pulled this off . . . I'll never know.

It has XM Radio, a hands free phone, and OnStar which was a surreal way to drive off the lot since the dealer actually reached inside the window and activated it as I was preparing to roll up my window.

"Let's get you up and running," he said as he pressed the little OnStar button on my rear view mirror.

"Thanks," I replied, thinking that maybe he'd just activated something so I could use it if I got caught in an avalanche or locked my keys in the car.

I rolled out onto Silver Spring Drive in a snowstorm . . . feeling good . . . the new ride . . . ohhhhh yeahhhhh.

And then I almost went Depends right there on the new driver's seat . . . . . .

"Hello Mr. Jacobson, my name is Marsha. How are you enjoying your new Chevy HHR?"

The voice was coming from inside the car.

"Fine," I said, while glancing into the back seat because of that one urban legend.

"I'll tell you what, my aunt bought one last year, and she just loves it."

"Oh," I'm three seconds into meeting Marsha whose bodyless voice is talking to me in a snowstorm in a new purchase that, since I don't own a home, is the most valuable material item I now have, "Awesome."

"You'll have a lot of fun."

"Yeah, I, uhhh, hope to." Screw this. "Hey Marsha?"

"Yes, Mr. Jacobson."

"Where are you right now?"

"I'm at the OnStar call center." This meant nothing.

"Oh. OK." I froze. I couldn't do it. "I guess that makes sense." I couldn't subject her to the harrassment I reserve for telemarketers.

I backed down and submitted. She already had all my information but needed to confirm it. She even knew where I was at.

"I see you're getting ready to get onto the interstate highway," This left me just shy of freaked. I felt like Jack Bauer. I wanted FBI files patched in as I headed out toward the sleeper cell's safehouse.

Except I was going to the Target in Grafton to get winter floor mats.

It kept snowing. Marsha and I kept talking. When we finally said goodbye to each other I went ahead and found all the swear word stations on XM. The Target snack shop popcorn was real good.

Later, I got an iPod jack for the stereo on sale at Best Buy. I tried to find Marsha to tell her about it, but I got some other guy at a different call center. He didn't know her.

A Screenshot of an Online Version of a Major Newspaper Tells a Thousand Stories

2009-01-09T08:39:00.001-08:00

Oh dear . . .

College Football is Stupid

2009-01-08T05:18:00.000-08:00

I voted for Barack Obama for one reason: He's promised to "throw [his] weight around" in an effort to get an eight team Division IA college football playoff system in place.

Tonight is silly, and here's why. I'm not watching. You shouldn't either. It means nothing. It proves nothing. It's a game set up by a glorified ping pong ball lottery bin. ~JDJ

The Minnesota U.S. Senate Pool

2009-01-06T13:19:00.000-08:00

Remember this????

We're close now.

Entries are still being accepted (but you have to go to the original post to submit them).

~JDJ

College Educations and the Economic Meltdown and the End of the Grand Illusion

2009-01-03T05:23:00.000-08:00

Megan McArdle and Daniel Drezner had a candid conversation about what the past several months might mean for colleges and universities that aren't state affiliated. Check it out:

I'm a graduate of the University of Illinois, so I'm biased. I don't get it. I unapologetically subscribe to the results of just about every study that's ever been done on the subject: There's NO correlation between what you'll earn in the real world and what you pay for your college education. Furthermore, as a public university graduate, I wholly reject the argument that there's something magical about the learning experience of a private school. My classes were taught by mind-blowing professors who challenged me on a daily basis. I never felt like a number. I never "got lost" in any system. It was worth every state government supplemented penny for all the right reasons.

Since last September I've sent out 112 letters of recommendation for various high school students. 73 of them went to private schools (some Ivy, some small liberal arts, etc.). Public universities don't get as hung up on particulars when it comes to the admissions process, so my data is skewed. [I've seen just about every application there is to see over the years and I'm here to share the news: Private colleges and universities are much more demanding of students when it comes to the game of APPLYING to get in.]. What's the shot of this situation? Are my students having the rules of the game changed on them . . . in the middle of the game? Is yesterday's private school aspiration tomorrow's public school reality?

Drezner's most interesting comment dealt with the economics of brain power. If the best and brightest begin to move toward less expensive (aka, public) colleges and universities then won't those establishments become de facto academically elite (which, again, I'd like to suggest is already the case)? If so, what will be the long term consequences for private colleges? If the big secret gets out then what incentive will there be to pay $50,000 a year when $15,000 will get the job done better? When times get tough, adhering to tradition has its limits, and tradition (not academic superiority) is what fuels the private college and university system in this nation.

I attended a dinner party on New Year's Eve. It was a small gathering of remarkably successful friends: Private sector executives (some VP's, some partners, etc.), a couple of engineers, me (a teacher), and a flight attendant. The degrees at the table? UW Whitwater, UW Milwaukee, UW Milwaukee, UW Madison, Southeast Missouri State, UW Oshkosh, and the University of Illinois. We had a wonderful time.

And we felt quite adequate.

I don't mean for that to sound defensive. The theme of this post is simple, and if you've digested it, then you know that if I feel anything, it's as if I've gotten away with something. We're not exactly talking Will Hunting dressing down a Harvard kid in a Boston bar. A distant relative to that classic scene? Perhaps. Illinois did cost money, and it was considerably more than late fees at a public library.

But it was less . . . . wayyyyyyy less . . . than what Dartmouth would have set me back. And, if I may, it was worth every dollar saved.

Admit It. When You Heard What Governor Blagojevich Did . . .

2008-12-31T08:14:00.000-08:00

. . . you smiled!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

My oh my.

What's that? You didn't smile? Sorry, but I don't believe you.

The Governor, as we all know, went and got himself into some majorly hot water earlier this month. He deserves all the public scorn he's getting (Before you jump my case, don't forget #5). Some of the tongue-lashing had even come from the appointee himself. But the Democratic caucus in the U.S. Senate and various members of Illinois' state government had to make sure their outrage was properly measured, so they started shooting off their mouths without looking at all the permutations on the chess board.

The Illinois Secretary of State won't certify any appointment made by the Governor.

The U.S. Senate won't seat (???) any appointment made by the Governor.

Yeah, OK . . . . way to paint an already mean dog into a corner everybody. Even Cesar Milan would throw his hands up if Rod Blagojevich inhabited a basset hound.

I fall back on a few cliches with my students. I've been teaching for 20 years. It's like trying to come up with new plotlines for another season of ER, sometimes you have to recycle some material. Anyway, one of my favorites is this: The scariest person coming toward you on the street is the person who's decided he has nothing left to lose.

In this case, that would be the current Governor of Illinois, wouldn't it?

What was it about those tapes that made everyone think he'd respond well to threats, that he wouldn't ultimately go ahead and fill the vacancy? Did I miss the part where he gave the appearance of being a rational human being?

Sure, we all wish, upon hearing those line-in-the-sand sermons on the mount from Illinois politicians and U.S. Senators, that we'd of said . . . . "Wait, what if the Governor appoints a scandal-free Black man (to a presently Black man-less U.S. Senate) who states outright that he's only interested in finishing off the last two years of the term? And what if this guy isn't mentioned on any of the criminal complaint tapes? And what if it's fairly apparent that, even though the Governor said he wasn't going to give the seat away for 'fucking nothing' he actually does give it away for fucking nothing? Wouldn't that mean that the Illinois Secretary of State and pretty much the entire U.S. Senate would be in what George Clooney's Everett once called, 'A tight spot'?"

But we didn't say this, and that's why, if we can get over ourselves for just a second, we should all stay in the present and enjoy the moment.

We should smile at his morbid brilliance. We DID NOT see that one coming. Touche' mon Blago!

The Governor will be impeached by Valentines Day. It may be a while before you get to see someone remotely like him again. Just go ahead and let yourself admire him for goodness sake.

The 2009 Predictions

2008-12-30T07:10:00.000-08:00

NOTE: As of January 5, 2009, I'm 0 for 1.

The problem with making predictions for 2009 is that it’s apparently the first year to follow 2008. Back in my hometown of Cornell, Illinois (population: 505) we have a word for years like 2008. Let's keep things family friendly and not print it. [HINT: The first two syllables are "Cluster-" and the last syllable is a Tony Montana refrain.]

I used to sit down on or about this day and list off about 30-50 predictions for the coming year. It got to where I even had a little Web 1.0 following. I did badly, barely topping 50% accuracy from one year to the next. But, as one of my old college professors once told me: "If you make enough outlandish guesses about the future, you'll sound like a genius sooner or later." He was right. As it turned out, that was all I was doing (even if I didn't know it at the time). I just needed the one hit to look good, and I usually got it. For instance, number 54 was a particular source of pride a couple years ago (NOTE: I read a lot of media analysis as a function of my occasional part time job. The, uhhhh, 'topic' came up . . . and it made sense . . . so I made the prediction. Enough written).

2009 is about getting real, so I'll restart the tradition I've let slip for a couple years with one newly applied rule: No BS. Here's a list of forecasts that would make my former professor proud. Put another way, here's a list of guesses that are heartfelt as opposed to being a bunch of random attempts to (sooner or later) sound like a genius. I push it on a couple, especially the second Bernie Madoff one, but I stand by them all. If they were to happen at given points or over a phase of time during the coming year, I wouldn’t be able to look you in the eye and say I was surprised. On the contrary, I’d find each and every one of the items below to be the stuff of predictability (which is why I’m on going record in suggesting that they are actually going to happen).

With absolutely no organizational system applied to either order or importance, here are my predictions for 2009. (WARNING: Again, just to be clear, that's 2009. What you're about to read won't always be uplifting. Sorry.)

1—The record number of home foreclosures attained in 2008 will be broken in 2009. As it turns out, subprime is just the beginning. There are a host of other silly, irresponsible mortgage instruments out there that haven’t even come to the front of the line yet. We’ve just been too swamped by the really silly and irresponsible ones to notice that this isn’t a detached runaway traincar. It is, in fact, an entire train. My guess is that 2010 will be even worse, but I don’t want to get ahead of myself. I swear I’m really NOT trying to sound like a genius here. Do a little research. Talk to a few industry people who aren’t in denial (They tend to be the ones who’ve gotten out of the industry which makes them former industry people, I guess.) The whole thing actually is going to get worse before it gets better. Turns out this wasn’t just a cliché being dropped by all those experts you saw on CNBC.

2—The Dow will not go above 10,250. This is what it means to be in a recession. Granted, corporate America is sort of on sale right now. Really, there are some kick ass buys out there. You can recognize this without trying to give the appearance of being a genius. While we wallow in all the horrible-ness of the worst recession in (at least) two generations, the market tends to be an awesome predictor of what will be as opposed to what is. That’s why it won’t leave the mid-8000’s. Compared to where we were, the mid-8000’s is terrible, and terrible is where we deserve to be for an extended period of time. Later rather than sooner (let’s say around August or September) there’ll be enough boredom with the notion of spectating at the fire sale, and demand will start to outstrip the cautionary discipline that’s keeping things so low. Everyone will actually start to act on what they already know, namely that stocks are cheap and they should be bought while they’re cheap because one day they’ll be worth more. Even if capital gains start to be figured as regular income (a 2010 prediction if ever there was one, right?) money is still money so you might as well make it even if you’ll ultimately have to pay non-Bush taxes on it when you make it. I don’t think there’s a single thing here that makes me sound like a know-it-all. At the end of the day it's all about buying low and selling higher than low.

3---More bank failures will occur in 2009 as compared to the number of bank failures that occurred in 2008. Remember the general theme of what was discussed in #1 above? Take that and inject it with steroids. Again, we’ve been distracted by how bad things are now to pay any real attention to what’s coming (which is worse). If you thought Hank Paulson was suffering from a God complex with his “ye shall live and ye shall die” approach to concerns like AIG and Lehman Brothers, ye ain’t seen nothing yet. OK, that reads a little ‘know-it-all-ish’ but I swear it’s not. We’re really only a few months into this. It’s the same theme: We’ve been too awestruck by the badness of the now to properly pay attention to the badness that’s coming . . . and a lot of banks bet stupidly.

4—Unemployment will go over 8.8%. These things happen during major economic downturns. We shouldn't be surprised when they do. If I worry about anything, it’s that this number is way low. If I were trying to sound like a genius, I’d add a percentage point to it.

5—Rod Blagojevich will be removed from office via the impeachment process. He will not plead guilty to any criminal charges. He will not be convicted in a criminal trial. Look, from a criminal standpoint, it’s over. Fitzgerald did what he had to do in order to preserve the integrity of the Senate and give the incoming Administration and Congress a fighting chance at dealing with the worst economic crisis in 75 years, but he sacrificed his case in order to pave this road (I’m beginning to think he’s a Democrat which makes the whole thing just that much more ironic.) When an attorney of Fitzgerald’s ability level actually makes a public announcement during a press conference asking people “to come forward” if they know anything, that’s a pretty good bet he jumped the gun (which, again, was what he had to do). But Illinois' state government is paralyzed and will remain that way so long as Blago is in power. Impeachment isn’t a criminal mechanism; thus, it can be used to take someone out of office for being an asshole. There isn’t a person on the planet who thinks that Rod Blagojevich is innocent of being an asshole.

6—General Motors will declare bankruptcy. Ever take a real good look at what kind of shape this company is actually in? The situation is terminal. The Bush and Obama people know this. The union contracts have to be torn up. Mitch McConnell's motives may be south of pure in the grand old right-to-work state of Kentucky (the land of my birth and early upbringing) but that doesn't mean he was wrong. Finding sustainable solvency will be a lot more complicated than just undermining the UAW, but it starts there. Chapter 11 is the only way to take such a step. It’s like having a sore tooth that you know will require the dentist to fire up the drill. You can go about your days, hoping it’ll just go away. But, deep down, you know you’re going to have to make the appointment, fire up the nitrous oxide, take the needle in the mouth, and read (while legally stoned) the inspirational poster on the ceiling. GM’s share of the 17.4 billion dollars is like that gum numbing spray you can buy over the counter. We really are delaying the inevitable here. [Disclaimer: I get credit for this one if GM merges with a foreign owned company or if the Obama Administration bribes them with incentives to file for bankruptcy.]

7—Oil will stay under $50 a barrel in spite of OPEC production cuts designed to drive it to $75 a barrel. We’ll determine the accuracy of this one on December 31, 2009. I’m not saying it won’t peak up over 50 every now and then, but supply and demand is an incredibly simple concept that’s central to how this market works no matter what experts declare. For all the reasons given and a few of the ones yet to be given, demand will drop in a way that trumps production cuts. So I get credit for this one if it’s at $49.99 or less on 12/31/09. [Disclaimer: If India and Pakistan start a shooting war with one another then I get to adjust this to 80 dollars a barrel]

8— [WRONG] The Indianapolis Colts will win the Super Bowl. It’s Peyton’s turn, and they’re playing kick ass football at the right time. Watch out for the Ravens, though.

9—The Detroit Red Wings will win a second straight Stanley Cup. This will be the only good thing to happen in the entire city of Detroit for all of 2009. Also, I'm hoping to see my beloved Blackhawks finally end their years of wandering in the wilderness and have a nice little playoff run themselves.

10—The Chicago Cubs will not make the post season. We’ve lost nine straight playoff games, prospective new owner Mark Cuban is the subject of an SEC probe, the Tribune Company is bankrupt, and we’re even poised to become ancillary to the list of topics central to Blago-gate. The glass slipper has gone pumpkin. Check back in 2010 or 2011. What’s the half life of the most virulent chemical found in goat shit?

11—The New York Yankees will not make the World Series. Making the World Series is the only standard of success for a team that’s spent like a bunch of good old boys at an AIG (post bailout) corporate retreat. Small ball is here to stay. I don’t think you can buy mega-talent as a means of getting to the Fall Classic any longer. Like the real world, (baseball) things are changing. [NOTE: It's impossible to write about baseball without sounding like a know-it-all, but the prediction is based in sound analysis of America's passtime. NOTE II: I don't believe in hate, but if I did, the Yankees would be at the front of the recipient line].

12—Barack Obama’s approval rating will not go below 53%. He’s just too popular and the degree to which people comprehend how bad things are will extend his honeymoon late on into the year. Forget 100 days. Try 300, at least. So even if he begins to hemorrhage some popularity, he’s well buffered. This one hit me in the wake of the Blagojevich scandal. The stuff that used to stick doesn't stick to Barack Obama. That's a good thing because we're in need of rationality (which is rarely supported from an intellectual standpoint by a 24 hour news cycle's appetite for content). Hopefully, the whole thing won't go to their heads (but if it does, then you'll see some stuff start to stick).

13—A record number of car dealerships will go out of business in 2009. Talk to ANYONE in the business. This prediction is pretty much like me suggesting the N.Y. Giants will beat the 5th place finishers in the Chester, Pennsylvania Pop Warner football league. It’s going to happen, and that’s about all there is to it. If I wanted to go all 'know-it-all' on you I'd say (for even money) that it'll happen by September 15th, but I'm not. I'll play it safe and just take the whole year to see it come true. I should be ashamed of this one because of its amazing no brainer status.

14—An act (or coordinated series of acts) of “soft target terrorism” will occur on U.S. soil resulting in the loss of at least fifty lives. Don’t feel superior to Mumbai. Don’t comfort yourself by believing something like that couldn’t happen here. If nineteen people can take down 4 commercial airplanes on the same day then forty guys with explosives under their coats can walk into the stands of forty high school football games on a Friday night and detonate at an agreed upon time. Soft target terrorism is the new frontier. Airports are too much trouble and the nation can be crippled just as easily by going this route. When Joe Biden suggested there was a likelihood of a major terrorist attack on U.S. soil in the first year of an Obama presidency, everyone reacted to the comment in the context of how it affected the campaign, but no one actually took the time to discuss what he said. That's a shame. It's a conversation we should be having. Bill Clinton gave an interview shortly after 9/11 where he summed up Al Qaeda in a way we should all strive to keep near the surface of our thoughts. In his typically eloquent yet accessible style he pointed out that Bin Laden's soldiers were most skilled at recognizing the seams in our security and exploiting them for maximum damage. One doesn't have to spend any time in a Waziri training camp to find soft target seams. One only needs the will to exploit them. We've been living on borrowed time for nearly eight years. Our number is up.

15—More U.S. Soldiers will die in Iraq in 2009 as compared to 2008. As the draw down begins, so too will the resurgence of killing. It’s the way of war: 1943, the Vietnamization phase, etc. What’s left of the insurgency, be it in its dying days or in the midst of a Taliban-like reconstitution (NOTE: It's too soon to tell), the recipe will be the same: Make sure that they (the U.S.) exit in a way that makes them look like they’re weak (even if they’re not) no matter what the cost. I don't honestly know if the insurgency will be successful in its effort, but I do know its members are willing to die trying (and, by extension, kill more of our people than they did this year).

16—Talk radio ratings will increase in 2009 as compared to 2008 while, at the same time, independent polling will demonstrate an increased degree of disconnect between what’s advocated on talk radio and actual voter behavior. In other words, talk radio will become more profitable and more a traditional form of entertainment media (and less a traditional form of news media) . . . simultaneously. In a way this is already happening. Conservative talk radio is stylistically copied by liberal talk radio. The format is based on the Clinton-impeachment-grounded method of identity politics and formulaic partisan denunciation (and while the right is still predominant from a frequency-leasing standpoint, the left is growing its listenership by stealing the right's methodology). It’s entertaining stuff, principally because it creates an emotional connection to the product without requiring the consumer to do a great deal of thinking. Rush Limbaugh deserves every penny of his new $400,000,000 contract. The format is more profitable than ever, but it no longer matters in the way it once did. Might I recommend you Google “2008 economic crisis” as well as “2008 election results” if you think I’m wrong. Shows that tend to focus on studied analyses of complex events will be the emergent winners in the news media game. This is a good thing. Nothing quite like an economic crisis when it comes to people wanting to be smarter than they've allowed themselves to be.

17—Bernard Madoff will not spend a single night in a state of incarceration. It takes too long to prepare for a trial like the one he’s going to have and he’s already posted bail. Also . . .

18— . . . Bernard Madoff will commit suicide. Let’s just leave this one right at the edge of my effort to not try and get lucky and sound like a genius. I’ve got a feeling. That’s all I’ll say. I get one, don't I? Awww hell, I admit it, I have no willpower.

19—Independent polling will reveal that over 50% of Americans believe that George W. Bush was the worst President in their lifetimes. And don't be surprised if that number for those who identify themselves as Republicans is over 35%. We'll see. I'm planning a future post on the new divide in the GOP. I'm not talking so much about the growing rift between the social conservative wing and the fiscal conservative wing as much as the gaping chasm that's already formed between suburban Republicans and rural Republicans (SNEAK PEAK: The rural Republicans appear to be the ones who are staying true to the party's core principles . . . but that's for another post)

20—U.S. Supreme Court Justices Souter and Stevens will either retire or announce their retirements. They’ve both wanted out for a while, and now the coast is clear.

21—Barack Obama will not be successful in any effort he undertakes to quit smoking. Most people who’ve smoked for as long and as much as he has fail when they try to quit. Mr. Obama is no different. Recovering alcoholics and drug addicts are often encouraged to smoke. It helps to take the edge off of the reality that’s pummeling your soul into the ground. Anyone who would willingly allow himself to be sworn in as President of the United States in 2009 should be afforded all the edge-removing behaviors of a recovering alcoholic and/or drug addict. Just don't do it in front of the girls, the puppy, or the general public.

22—Chris McCormack will win the Ironman World Championship. Back to non-smokers. This guy’s the most formidable iron-distance athlete in the world. He had a mechanical failure on his bike this past year. The odds of that happening again are next to zero. I saw him break 8 hours in Frankfurt this past July. He's a freak of nature.

23—Lance Armstrong will win an 8th Tour de France. Does anyone doubt he can do it? Most hard core cycling geeks agree that he left the sport with two or three additional titles still in his legs. Surely he’s good for one more. The guy falls into that rarest of categories, the one where conventional wisdom, as it applies to limitations, should be thrown out the door. Also, even though I love the French (and, more importantly, France) if there's any truth to the stereotype about them not liking him . . . well . . . it would be freaking sweet to stick it to them (on this one).

24--Iranian President President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will not be re-elected in the summer. His popularity is dropping like George W. Bush in the final summer of a second term (aka, He's not popular and getting less so by the day). Why? He can't deliver the perks he once used to opium-ize the masses when oil was $100 a barrel. Also, he's an asshole like Rod Blagojevich [and his incredibly young nation is waking up to said fact]. Hopefully I'll get credit for this one as a result of the electoral process (which is set to take place in June) and not because of some 30th anniversary redux.

The last two are for me. Sorry if this comes off as self aggrandizing.

25—This one’s personal. If you ask, I may discuss it in a face to face setting, but I won’t discuss it here. It’s business. The prediction is this: I will successfully repackage the first product and make a concerted effort to sell it. I will produce a second product as well as a third product and undertake independent efforts to sell them both. I have all the external affirmation I need to move into this chapter and undertake the challenge. The success I've experienced in life has always derived from a combination of knowing I was talented enough to do what I felt I could do (along with knowing that far less talented people were already doing it), throwing caution to the wind by diving into the endeavor, and hard work. I'm ready to throw those ingredients into the blender and press the button.

26—I’m hemming and hawing about including this last one, but it would be nice to have something to reference with the click of a mouse. So, assuming reasonable conditions (temperature between 66 and 72 degrees, winds of no more than 12 miles per hour, no rain), on September 13, 2009, at the 8th annual Ironman Wisconsin, I think I can . . . .

. . . . come out of the water in under 70 minutes

. . . . get through transition 1 one in under 8 minutes

. . . . get through the bike course in under 5 hours and 50 minutes (just over 19.2 miles per hour)

. . . . get through transition 2 in under 4 minutes

. . . . get through the run course in under 3 hours and 48 minutes (just over 8:41 pace)

. . . . which will put me at just under 11 hours for the day. [NOTE: I get credit for an accurate prediction, regardless of the accuracy of the breakdown goals, if this last one holds up.]

OK, that about does it. Please drop me an email when you see one of these come up, irrespective of my accuracy. I need oversight. Other than #18, I think I've lived up to the no BS standard. Obviously, I'm hoping to be wrong on a number of them . . . but I genuinely fear that I won't be. On the other hand, I'm really hoping to be right on several of them (especially the last two along with, admittedly, #23).

I wish you all a most pleasant 2009.~JDJ

johnjacobson@gmail.com

Day Three In the Same Clothes: Get Ready

2008-12-29T05:04:00.000-08:00

I expect to finally fly out of Cincinnati in a few hours. My luggage has been in Milwaukee since Saturday, but the extra time here has been well worth my while. The Delta overnight kit is quite nice, the hotels have been awesome, and I'm sitting on $1,300 in free plane tickets.

My time at the Sheraton has taught me the following:

1--In the grand debate between Packers GM Ted Thompson and former Packers (current Jets) quarterback (and future hall of famer) Brett Favre, the winner is Chad Pennington.

2--I'm probably a couple weeks away from polishing off season one of Jericho (while riding my bike in preparation for Ironman Wisconsin), and I'm totally geeked to start season 4 of Lost. I should note here that I watch ALL of my non-news/non-sports/entertainment-based television while riding my bike from roughly November through mid April of every year. Anyway, the balance to Lost has been found. Have you guys heard of Californication? I just saw one episode here last night. Wow. That's some amazing writing.

3--Can I still consider myself a movie buff if I haven't seen a single film on someone's top ten list?

4--The next time you're in Covington, Kentucky, do yourself a favor and dine at Nu/Vo. You won't be disappointed.

5--I'm bringing back a tradition in a day or so. Get ready for The 2009 Predictions. It promises to be intellectually stimulating.

Say What You Will About Chip Saltsman

2008-12-28T01:35:00.000-08:00

I know smart people who also happen to be Republicans, and I'm yet to meet a single one (willing to discuss the topic in an open and honest manner) who isn't just slightly south of terrified by the issues inherent to Chip Saltsman's less than tasteful decision.

If you're a Democrat, shut the hell up (You only stand to hurt yourself by chiming in on this one).

If you're a Republican, don't hate on Chip Saltsman. On the contrary, thank him. He put it out there (even if that wasn't his actual intent). You all need to come to terms with what he put out there. Villify Chip Saltsman all you want, but the issues will remain after his 15 minutes are up.

Delay My Trip Home, Please

2008-12-27T18:13:00.001-08:00

Goodness, goodness, goodness. I'm still in Cincinnati. I was supposed to come home today, but I'm still here.

And that's OK.

Maybe I'll get out of here tomorrow, maybe not.

We Are Unranked

2008-12-24T07:09:00.000-08:00

And that's just fine.

Sooooooooooooooo looking forward to my first Big Ten Basketball season with the Big Ten Network being pumped into my home (for free . . . and legally).

Join Me, Won't You?

2008-12-23T09:12:00.000-08:00

I woke up this morning and realized I was fried. I need a break from news. I used to do this every year, twice a year, without fail. But I slipped over the course of the past few years and, simply put, didn't do it.

Time for a news blackout.

I'm going to do my absolute best to ignore news until 2009. I can follow sports, weather, etc. But no news. I'm flying to Cincinnati in a couple hours (Mother Nature and the NTSB willing). I just threw my newspaper, Newsweek, and both issues of the Economist on the recycle pile. Just a book ('My Ishmael' by Daniel Quinn) and a hard drive with a few screenplays on it.

I may still post. If something huge happens would one of you email me? Thanks.

John Jacobson
johnjacobson@gmail.com

When did this happen?

2008-12-19T13:05:00.001-08:00

Paul Krugman Bogarted my last post, but there are a few questions that ought to be raised in the wake of all this.

Can you feel it? Do you sense, like I do, that there are more than a few people out there who will condemn Mr. Madoff publicly, but, without admitting it to anyone, admire him just a little bit in private?

When did this happen? When did the right co-opt the left's ability to criticize the desire to acquire wealth? Seriously, play the familiar tape to the end (Actually, that cliche' needs to change: So instead, play the familiar mp3 file to the end):

A-A guy makes a lot of money in the financial sector.

B-Everyone assumes the guy is smart.

C-Everyone assumes the guy worked hard and, as a result, EARNED his money . . . irrespective of the fact it might be, by conventional middle class standards, an obscene amount that wasn't really earned in the classical sense of adding value.

D-Someone, ostensibly a little left of center, criticizes the guy, the system that allowed the guy to earn such an enormous amount of money, or both.

E-The left-of-center-critic just mentioned in 'D' (hitherto referred to as LOCC) is, in turn, criticized by the right (and even a goodly number of souls on the left) as being out of touch, probably a socialist, etc.

F-Most people (on the left and the right) assume LOCC is just a tad naive . . . and, although we'd dare not say it publicly, a little jealous because he's clearly not as smart (and probably not as hard working) as the guy who made a lot of money in the financial sector.

My questions: [1] When did this happen? [2] Why did it happen? [3] Whose fault is it? I'm going to comment on my own post with a round of answers. I ask you to feel free to do the same.

We're All Out of Order

2008-12-19T08:21:00.001-08:00

[Really Pathetic Blogger's Note: I was intending to write a longer version of what you see below, but then I got beat to the punch by some Nobel Prize winner. Upon reading his piece this morning, I stopped working on my post immediately as he (not surprisingly) says better what I had wanted to convey. The trigger point in his piece that iced the theme of my piece, comes in the last four paragraphs of what he wrote, but I recommend you read the whole thing. He's damn good. On a personal note, this is a really cool thing you can do in the pathetic world of blogging because you're your own boss, albeit for a company that makes no money, but you get to do whatever you want. It's a snow day at Shorewood High School. Like I want to write???]

Here's what I'd written before I stopped . . . .

On second thought, it would appear that Senator McCain was right, SEC Chairman Chris Cox should be fired. As the epic realities of the Madoff scheme come to light, there can be no other conclusion. If Chris Cox were a high school civics teacher, someone paid to perform a duty that involves, at its core, the conveyance of the principles of our democracy to a room full of teenagers, then the final exam would only be fair if it asked those young learners to construct haikus about their favorite flavors of ice cream. The correlation between job description and actual job product is, as far as I can tell, fairly judged in this hypothetical scenario---at least by the standards we now have to use for the SEC in the wake of a $50,000,000,000 fraud that has allowed me to do something I never thought I'd get to do: In the great net worth competition being played out in America's final weeks of being seen as a primarily capitalist society, I can now say that I just passed up a few a dozen people whose respective estates were at least eight figures a piece, and I can say that I did it in a day . . . and I can say that I did it by essentially standing still. My net worth is decent, but not high enough to qualify for the Madoff club. Lucky me.

It's happened . . . to a number of people. You're worth 15 million dollars one day, and then you're eligible for food stamps the next. Sure, it's easy to harden the shell and feel no sympathy. Caveat emptor. If it's too good to be true, it's not . . . dumbasses. What were you thinking when you saw year-in, year-out returns that, statistically speaking, were impossible? You remind me of the mathematically illiterate tour de force that argued, just over eight years ago, that a margin of 537 votes out of just under 6,000,000 was a plausibly acceptable definition for electoral victory. I mean, have you ever seen 537 people gathered together in a room? That's a lot! (NOTE: This argument was actually made to me by a friend who has a medical degree from a prestigious university in the United States of America.)

I get it.

Mathematical illiteracy (even when used as a crutch by otherwise intelligent people) is a convenient way of putting the whole thing to rest at a time when the majority of us who live down here in the seven figure, six figure, five figure, and four figure net worth categories . . . have plenty of other matters over which to expend our stress. It got to be like the Wild West out there (the U.S. financial sector) and, like most chapters in this Wild West drama of the U.S. economy, it has consequences for us all. Ol' Doc Jones' stall of horses is still missing even if we did catch that Madoff rustler, and now we'll have a harder time getting medicines for the sick folk in town.

It leaves me with the feeling that something is profoundly wrong here. [At the 4:16 point of the epic scene, Al Pacino says it all]

Madoff did this over the course of more than just the Bush Administration. Democrats and Republicans alike have this blood on their hands. We're all out of order. How does this happen? Where does trust go when it can't be a part of the U.S. economic infrastructure?

------[Communication terminated by Dr. Krugman's Nobelly mind and just overall level of awesomeness]

Pumpkin Cheesecake

2008-12-16T19:25:00.000-08:00

Sanity is achieved through it.

Eliot Spitzer speaks!

2008-12-15T17:14:00.001-08:00

Excellent stuff.

I win

2008-12-14T19:33:00.001-08:00

Yes!

Now we're getting pathetic!

2008-12-12T08:13:00.000-08:00

Forget Illinois politics.

This is the most important weekend of the year.

Why? Look at this, then this, and finally this!

This is my year.

Blago-gate Hits Home

2008-12-11T08:05:00.000-08:00

'Impeach Blagojevich' signs are common in my home town.

Here's why.

My worst fear come true.

2008-12-10T15:12:00.000-08:00

I had a feeling it was him.

Here's the tragedy: It doesn't matter.

It doesn't matter if he's telling the truth or not. He's not going to be the next Senator from the great state of Illinois (and he would have made a good one, I'm convinced).

I'm just so sad. Really, I am. This is all genuinely sad.

Day Two

2008-12-10T08:18:00.000-08:00

Scott Turow, the attorney turned successful novelist, offers some raw information and genuine perspective in this piece.

It's . . . true

2008-12-09T18:53:00.000-08:00

Saddens me to write it, but this (which is hilarious) is a decent description of my home state's political culture.

The hair alone is worthy of a grand jury and a pot of coffee.

Who the hell is candidate 5?

2008-12-09T08:36:00.000-08:00

Oh dear, dear, dear . . . . this is getting messy, messy, messy.

Glad I didn't drop this name

2008-12-09T06:57:00.001-08:00

I could have, but that's another story.

Wow.

To Name Drop, Or Not To Name Drop

2008-12-06T07:51:00.001-08:00

I have an degree in education from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. We're in the Big Ten. We're big. We're one of the eleven schools in the conference. It's all there for anyone who can read.

We're land grant. We do for the local economy what any military base does for its immediate environment . . . just without the weekend passes and subsequent strip clubs.

We're the center of the show otherwise known as the University of Illinois system, which, along with the rest of the state's public universities, boasts a surprisingly tight knit group of education colleges. Sooner or later, everyone knows everyone else, or, at worst, everyone knows someone who knows a particular someone else. For instance, I know one of Tony Romo's professors. Tony Romo, like a lot of quarterbacks at Eastern Illinois University, thought it best to prepare for something other than a career in the NFL. Apparently teaching crossed his mind for at least a class or two. I've tried to get notes to Jessica Simpson through these degrees of separation, but my cousin in Cincinnati knows a guy who knows Nick Lachey, and he's still clearly not ready to let me have any contact.

Healing takes time, and sometimes we say things we don't mean. I apologize, Nick. I never should have asked.

Amidst 38,000 U of I undergrads, anytime I needed anything, I'd just pop in on my adviser (who also happened to be the dean of the college). Worse, I'd do it unannounced. Charm? Maybe. Taking advantage of the tight knittedness? You bet. The relationship we formed was special. I could say things to her that perplexed me, confused me, tormented me. By the end, she was more of a counselor than anything.

I could even say things to her that I didn't mean, and she'd forgive me.

There were others in the College of Education: Powerful intellectuals, role models in the land of perpetual thought experiment. They taught me to fear the lecture, to make student engagement the 'thing' [as it were], to develop even a little bit of contempt for the traditional classroom. You can be a political moderate and also be a teacher, but if you want to be a good teacher in the 21st century, your angle on the job preparation better be progressive, or it's over before you've even started. It might be that so many teachers get branded as liberals because, in order to be any good at teaching, you have to be anything but traditional in terms of your professional world view.

After I graduated, one of the most influential professors I had took a new position within the system but away from the line-of-sight abundant cornfields of downstate Illinois. He went to UIC (The University of Illinois-Chicago, not to be confused with its faux Ivy semi-namesake, the University of Chicago where the President-elect taught constitutional law). It was at UIC that he met and got to know Bill Ayers. Through this connection I met Dr. Ayers several years ago. In fact, I knew who Bill Ayers was before I'd even heard of Barack Obama. Before the President elect was a 'skinny guy with a funny name', Dr. Ayers was the 'Weather Underground' guy. But that title didn't remain for long. Pretty soon, he came to be known as the educational genius guy.

Spend five minutes with Bill Ayers and tell me if you can find the word terrorist anywhere on your mental radar. I dare you, one rational person to another. But I don't need to be his apologist. He's now cleared his own air in a predictably eloquent manner consistent with the style and grace I've come to expect of him. I can write these words and stand before you as someone who also doesn't condone the manner in which he chose to protest the Vietnam War. I get to do this because it's what rational people get to do. They also get to expect that other rational people will take them at face value.

I'm saying (writing) something that I do mean, and I don't need anyone's forgiveness because there's nothing wrong with saying (writing) it.

A few of us 'in the know' (I'll let them come out on their own as it's only my place to do so for myself) used to laugh out loud when we'd hear Governor Palin talk about Bill Ayers. We sat, drop-jawed, when America watched as Saturday Night Live took an entirely different approach to its candidate-as-guest formula and vindictively mocked her from less than fifteen feet away (Go to 1:07 remaining for the most Really Pathetic Blog relevant moment). I remember calling a friend the next day and saying, "It's not taking." His only response was to tell me that there was already a deal in the works to do a second printing of Ayers' book. We'd shake our heads in flagrant condescension toward anyone who'd fix a meaningful and attentive eye on one of the Obama-Ayers ads (even though the McCain people had the good sense to stop short of broadcasting the worst one of all).

It's a long road to post-partisan America. Since being elected, Barack Obama has called in several Senate markers to spare Joe Lieberman from a Democratic Party tar and feather jamboree, put Eric Holder (a Reagan appointed federal judge) in charge at Justice, kept Secretary Gates (a Bush appointee), put a moderate Republican in the most vital cabinet position of the day, and 'team-of-rivaled' his biggest rival of all.

And he met with his opponent. Snubbing him would have been bad politics for a guy who wants to change Washington. After all, things are a mess. There's no time to worry about healing. And two guys who ran against each other for President surely said some things they didn't mean along the way. It might not be realistic for President elect Obama to go out to every senior citizen in the U.S. and apologize, but I wonder, in the case of Senator McCain, since he could actually pull it off . . . ???

Probably not, and maybe it's best left that way. You can be sure that Dr. Ayers, who took the only rational path available (aka, shut up and stay low) when he "saw no viable path to a rational discussion," doesn't expect it to happen either.

In the meantime, I'll just keep enjoying the ride as the guy who tried to get into contact with Jessica Simpson via a professor at EIU only to be thwarted by my cousin representing Nick Lachey. All of that took place after having gone through the trenches working for John McCain in 2000, around about the same time I got to know Bill Ayers, several years before working for Barack Obama in 2008.

Whew.

There's no truth to the rumor that I have a dry erase board in my office with a picture of me in the center of a real world Kevin-Bacon-game, person-to-person connection matrix. No truth at all. But yes, I can get to Prime Minister Putin in three.

Now, about the time I met Kareem Abdul Jabar at O'Hare airport when I was nine years old, he was carrying this really exotic piece of luggage that . . . .

Enter The Really Pathetic Blog Minnesota U.S. Senate Pool!

2008-12-04T11:49:00.000-08:00

This bad boy's going to the U.S. Supreme Court. I can feel it.

So, here are the rules.

Enter the pool by commenting on this post (Please use your real name so we know who you are. You can enter your name under the 'Anonymous' option if you want.)

Guess at the following (Label each answer in your comment, please):

1--In whose favor will the U.S. Supreme Court rule? (Coleman or Franken): 10 points for a correct pick.

2--What will be the U.S. Supreme Court vote count? (i.e. 5 to 4, 7 to 2, etc.): 10 points for a correct pick (A 2 point penalty for every vote you miss it by up to 5 votes total which would put you at zero for this category).

3--What will be the legally recognized margin of victory in the Minnesota popular vote as a result of the Supreme Court's decision (A 0.1 point penalty for every vote you miss it by up to 100 votes total which would put you at zero for this category).

The winner gets a can of Campbell's Tomato Soup, paid for entirely out of The Really Pathetic Blog's operating budget.

Enter now! Once the U.S. Supreme Court agrees to hear the case, no additional entries will be accepted!

Jeff Spicoli scoops actual journalists in the real world

2008-12-02T08:11:00.000-08:00

When you first watched 'Fast Times at Ridgemont High' . . . .

. . . . did you ever think he would get to this point? Damn!

Food

2008-12-01T07:04:00.000-08:00

I try to keep it light here. At least . . . that's my goal. But, every now and then, I have this need to share that which I find to be profound.

Please watch or read this (and make sure you do both parts).

Flying Turkeys in Cincinnati

2008-11-27T10:46:00.000-08:00

Special thanks to Steve for finding and providing this classic.
Enjoy.

Even if We Win . . . . We Lose?

2008-11-24T07:00:00.000-08:00

Even though he started his career as a moderate Republican, it would appear that Timothy Geithner’s main pedigree is his un-Wall-Street-ness. Public sector finance wonkishness is hip. It's 'Revenge of the Nerds' without the frat houses.

Your first sign of hope in our endeavor to become a post-partisan nation will be around the start of baseball season. That’ll be deep enough into the Obama-Democrat-Dominance era to know how grown up everyone’s going to be when we start seeing classical government welfare (corporate and otherwise) as something that people take for granted. It won’t be long. In fact, it may already have gotten boring. I was more surprised by this morning’s snow than I was Citi’s fleet of lifeboats, courtesy of the Bush Administration. [If you want a taste of just how undeserving Citi is, read this, if you can stomach it.]

Don’t get me wrong. As nauseating as they are, I fully support the President’s economic policies in this financial-apocalyptic America, even if maybe we could all use a psychological jolt in the form of a 28th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The Bush people are doing the right thing. Doing nothing would be doing something; namely, letting a bank with $800,000,000,000 in assets fail. Happy Thanksgiving? I don’t think so.

Early April will be the time when, if they go old school, the GOP mega-minority can start making things look and sound like all of Hank Paulson’s ideas were actually Barack Obama’s ideas. This would assume, of course, that Hank Paulson’s ideas end up being silly. So what do we cheer for? If this trend toward socializing Wall Street works, then Obama’s people are certainly deft enough to own it all as their own. That could mean even more marginalization for the GOP (which took a huge beating the last time our economy was in this type of shape some 75 years ago). As much as we all should want to see the next President succeed are we also [perhaps unwittingly] sanctioning an outcome that would allow the Democratic Party to become a Superpower? How ironic would it be if a trend toward socialism made the GOP’s downfall similar to the USSR’s dissolution in 1991? Is the real cost of this economic crisis (if we get out of it in a reasonable amount of time) the existence of our bona fide two party system?

It’s a pickle. Any rational person would want to see all this market tinkering actually work, no matter who gets credit in the end. But that success could bring a major body blow to an already rib-crushed Republican Party which would leave an increasingly unchecked political infrastructure in Washington.

Don’t look to me for answers. We do our second Thanksgiving dinner on Saturday instead of Friday this year. I’ve decided to take advantage of my newly found free time and go out on Friday morning to see if there are any shoppers waiting in line to enter any building that houses anything remotely similar to a retail establishment. If I find some dutiful consumers huddled out in the cold hoping for the chance to actually spend money . . . I’m going to thank them.

But then I’ll probably tease them. I’m no Tim Geithner.

Malcolm Gladwell-izing Obama

2008-11-22T08:00:00.000-08:00

If President elect Obama can actually manage to introduce the post-partisan era to America then surely a good number of her citizens will feel like their day has finally arrived. The past sixteen years have had us tied up in a political culture seemingly more comfortable at the edges than the much more believable middle. Impeachment was supposed to be the worst of it, but then the ubiquity of talk radio and a multi-portal, perpetual news cycle drew more and more of us into believing that a political identity could actually be crafted like a watercolor painting.

Keith Olbermann said something. If I'm on the left, I need to believe it.

Bill O'Reilly said something. If I'm on the left, I shouldn't believe it.

Pretty easy stuff. Doesn't require a lot of thinking. Identity politics never does. I've long been wary of people who say they're conservative or liberal because, well, how would they know? Have they addressed every issue out there and come up on one side every time? Really? I'm supposed to believe a "Yes" on that one?

Karl Rove may like to call Barack Obama "the most liberal member of the U.S. Senate," but that's the kind of language you never use on a true-false question (when writing the test) because it'll always be false. It's too extreme. You're serious, Karl? Bernie Sanders? Russ Feingold? Any Republican who voted for the bailout? The President elect (now a former Senator, actually) beats them all?

The truth is, Barack Obama wouldn't have been able to win the way he won (or at all, for that matter) had he truly worn colors of the definitive left. And George W. Bush (just in case we forgot) won in 2000 with a reputation of being a Governor who was quite adept at bringing bipartisan production value to government. His Texas record suggests there's some truth to the reputation (which makes the past eight years only that much more of a mindfogger).

I like Mr. Obama. He strikes me as being incredibly smart, and this is a time for incredibly smart people. Incredible smartness isn't a guaranteed solution (See the Hoover and Carter Administrations), but it at least gives you a chance (See the Lincoln and FDR Administrations). The country appears ready to find an off ramp. We've been on this anti-intellectual highway for too long . . . which, incidentally, reminds me of a thought I had the other evening: Will the new GOP be rebranding itself in a manner that's more embracing of intellectualism? of curiousity? of the left-associated tendency to acknowledge complexity in the world? I believe they will. Listen to Bobby Jindal speak when you get a chance. The old (aka, pre-2008) GOP will either react with alienation or get on the train. Only one option leaves hope for the party's future. Above and and beyond all else, the lesson of 2008 will be, simply, that Americans don't want middling IQ's . . . or even the appearance of middling IQ's. If Barack Obama could find an appropriate way to send a thank you card to the 'just folks' hockey mom illuminati (who likely repelled more Republican votes than they gained), he should (but only after sending an even bigger one to the standing President).

The world is a complicated place. For a number of years, Republicans did well for themselves by making fun of Democrats whenever Democrats tried to point out that the world was a complicated place. Democrats reacted like 7th graders at a school sponsored dance by trying to pretend like they also thought the world wasn't a complicated place. Then a bunch of stuff happened (Iraqis in Baghdad not acting like the French did in Paris, the realities of rampant market deregulation, Vladimir Putin's judo video, etc.) which demonstrated, pretty clearly, that the world actually was a complicated place.

And Barack Obama was who he was . . . and was at where he was at . . . when the light bulb went on.

Al Gore and John Kerry respectively lost to the same guy for lots of reasons, but part of the problem was their perceived nerdiness. Both were actually told, on various occasions, to dumb down their rhetoric so they'd have a better chance of beating the Texas Governor/standing President. Even though it didn't work, the advice might not have been all that bad. The same advice (dumb down your rhetoric so you can get ahead of that Obama guy) fell flat on its face November 4th.

Americans don't like their politicians to be too intellectual. This is an assumption we've grown comfortable with to the point of accepting it as truth. But is it . . . true?

'Buying a house is a good investment', 'Windows Vista is a bad operating system', natural ability is the main influence on whether or not you'll be a success in life: These are just a few more examples of assumptions we make . . . that just might be flat-out wrong.

I teach in a fairly left leaning community, so I'll get into a little hot water for suggesting this: But Barack Obama is one hell of a (smart, collected) lucky guy. His obvious talent, while important, may have only been a dash of spice in an otherwise highly complex recipe that had more in common with the fable of stone soup than any entree at Jules Verne Restaurant. All skill sets put aside for the sake of argument, the overwhelming reality is this: He had the great fortune of coming around when, all of a sudden, the traditionally big liability in electoral politics (being an intellectual) suddenly became the big advantage.

Go do this. I've tried it twice. Grab a clipboard and hit the streets. Stop ten people randomly and tell them you have a one question survey: In your opinion, could Barack Obama have won the Presidency in 2004? You'll be lucky (I predict) to get more than three "yes" answers; furthermore, it doesn't matter where you're at. Start in the President elect's version of Crawford, Texas (otherwise known as Chicago's south side). You might be lucky to get one there. He is, indeed, an amazingly capable guy; but please don't leave out his unique upbringing, meeting Michelle, the planet aligning randomness of his chance to speak at the 2004 convention, and, at the risk of sounding angry, the wholly disasterous results of America's decision to go with the guy who'd be the best beer drinking buddy for the past eight years.

This country's bad breakup after a torrid yet dysfunctional love affair with anti-intellectualism made nerdiness so hip that we forgot about populism. The rules of engagement changed overnight. If you want to give Barack Obama credit for any of this, you're in denial because he had about as much influence over it as sun spot activity did on the Cubs playoff performance last October. But, again, he's really smart, and the state of the union is NOT strong, so you might want to become a Democrat of convenience if nothing else (at least for the time being) because a partisan America is now, in a flash, soooooo pre-11/4/08. I don't care what your politics are, you should want to see the President elect take the ball and drive the lane . . . fearless, playing by a new set of rules, shaking things up. If he actually can manage to introduce the post-partisan era to America then Malcolm Gladwell might conclude that America itself was ultimately in the right place at the right time . . . lucky as a day is long . . . to cross paths with the Barack Obama outlier.

Let's hope so.

Timothy Geithner's hat size just went from 7 and a half to 13

2008-11-21T13:34:00.000-08:00

He and he alone has the ultimate untrumpable line with the ladies this weekend, "Yeah, Barack Obama dropped my name on Friday and then the stock market went up by 550 points. Wanna dance?"

This man is significantly more cool than you.

The NRA and the coming heterosexual marriage boom

2008-11-16T12:18:00.000-08:00

It's on.

I just thank my lucky stars that she . . .

. . . said yes thirteen years ago. Who knows what might have happened had we waited until the Democratic Party tidal wave of 2008.

Any reasonable person would rightly conclude that it'll be only a matter of time before the restrictions kick in. That's why Wisconsinites loaded up with weapons last week even though there was no campaigning (from either party) to restrict future sales of firearms. Wisconsinites know better. I mean, come on people! Look at what isn't right in front of you! Not saying anything about taking your guns was clearly a tactic designed to make you feel comfortable and lull you into a false sense of security. Your present understanding of the 2nd Amendment is juuuuuuuuuuust fine. Go take a nap.

What are you doing reading this? Get your un(der?)armed self to the gunshop, poste haste!

Democrats are prone to think in deceptive terms. We all remember the dummy lockbox from the second Bush-Gore debate in 2000. If you're someone who wants guns, you need to think like the coolheaded next President of the United States (Your nemesis is a man who was able to get through the early stages of the financial crisis without suspending his campaign even once. That's who you're up against. He won't flinch.). You need to hedge and buy now so you can keep and bear later. If you're a Republican with ties to the SEC, you're already hedging by giving yourself a bargaining chip to be used against the President Elect in his own city. Even Barack Obama has bias (and it should be exploited).

If we're talking about taking guns from various cold dead hands then don't think for a minute that pitting Cubs fans against the far better armed, Obama-backed Sox fans is out of bounds. This is hardball.

All of it taken together is why I predict a record year for traditional, man and woman ("husband" and "wife" being just two additional examples of the left's sneaky, loopholey ways) heterosexual marriages. If they're coming for your Glocks then they're coming for your institutions. Time to start thinking on a whole new level. This is chess, not checkers. So, to review:

1--Get to the gun store and strap up.

2--If you're single and straight, get to a justice of the peace (preferably right after you leave the gun shop).

3--This one's more of a personal favor and not technically review: I know the stakes are high. The 2nd Amendment and the venerability of procreative-efforted marriage are not joking matters. But is there any way we could leave Mark Cuban out of this? I'm a Cubs fan. It's been (literally) one hundred years. The one genuine Maverick out there has a huge ego which he transfers into the success of his sports franchises (and possibly his ability to make money on the stock market). I'm a man married to a woman who also happens to be a member of the NRA. In your coming battle, my devotion to the Cubs makes me an innocent bystander. Look in your heart. Find that which makes you decent. Know mercy. Let my Cuban go.

Sorry Sarah

2008-11-15T05:29:00.000-08:00

Dear Sarah,

I owe you an apology. I tried. I really did. My tail's between my legs. I'm back.

It sort of helped when the hard drive on my old Dell died [thus denying me access to the internet for a month]. But then I got a new computer with all its fancy updated crack-esque magnetism. Like John McCain, history will surely judge that I didn't stand a chance. The slick new Inspiron in my lap right now is Barack Obama and mortgage backed securities all wrapped up into one "Defeat is imminent" bundle.

My love for you is stronger than ever, though. Your piece changed me. It got me off my butt and propelled me into a good stretch of intensive (offline) writing. I even have something copyrighted (although unsold) to show for it. So thanks a lot. And by the way, that's a tough business out there, the real world of writing. Who knew? The people don't actually care to read what you've labored to produce. In fact, they're kind of snobby about it. I suspect it's because most of them aren't family members or friends.

In the fake world of writing (aka, blogging) you can just put a link to your blog in the signature of your email account and then . . . send people (mostly family and friends) lots of emails, ostensibly about things other than your blog, so that, when asked, you can just go 'Oh yeah. I guess I did have that linked down there. Just something I do for fun, I guess.' The feigned aww shucks part is critical. You absolutely have to pretend as if you don't care, as if the link in the signature of your email account was possibly done accidentally and you've been too busy to remove it. I tried not caring in the real world of writing. Again, the fact that these people aren't my relatives or friends proved to be an enormous problem. Not only did they not care about my work, but they also didn't care about my appearance of not caring about whether or not they read my work.

My plan is to max out like an overrated NBA player and take this whole "I don't care" thing as far as everyone's willing to let me. The name of the blog helps. It's reverse psychology but with a little dash of Jedi mind trick. If I'm self deprecating right from the point of your reading the blog title, then you know I don't care, right? So you go ahead and read.

But even if you see through this and come to (accurately) realize that all I'm doing is trying to get you to read by pretending to not care, the fact that I wasn't even remotely subtle (see blog title again) makes it so that you're intrigued enough to read anyway.

We'll see how things go. It's not like I'm going to check the hit count or anything.

I promise to make this my methodone clinic. Real life is the real world of writing, this I understand. I know what I have to do, and, even though your advice is to the contrary, I'm going to try and do it anyway. If America can elect a guy with Hussein as his middle name then, by gosh, I can try to be a real world writer who also (just mentioning this in passing) maintains a blog. I'll drop in here for a hit every now and then which will hopefully keep me off the mean streets of Timesuckageville. I don't want to end up like Bubbles. The days will be devoted primarily to producing work that snobby people will never read, I promise.

Wish me luck.

Truly,
John Jacobson