Happy Halloween

Lateral It Home

Student Announcer Ensures Laterals Are Heard Around the World

By Joe Lapointe

New York Times

Jonathan Wiener is a sophomore English major from Mississippi who enjoys William Faulkner novels. He is comfortable with bursts of words and long, descriptive paragraphs.

So when Wiener’s narrative skills were put to a test Saturday in a football broadcast booth, he was prepared. For a young man with broadcasting ambitions, it was the pop quiz from heaven.

“I can’t think of anything better in the world than watching football and talking about it,” Wiener, 20, said in a telephone interview yesterday. “It was only one of the most improbable plays in college football history.”

Wiener, a student at Trinity University in San Antonio, was the play-by-play announcer for the Division III college football game between Trinity and Millsaps College in Jackson, Miss.

He was part of a four-man crew with only one camera in a telecast seen live only over the Internet. Trinity won, 28-24, on the final play by completing a forward pass and then scoring after 15 lateral passes that zigzagged across the field, taking 62 seconds to cover the 60 yards to the end zone.

Wiener kept his cool through the frenzy and described most of the details precisely as they occurred. The replay of the video with Wiener’s description has been shown on national television and has become a hit on the Internet.

“It wasn’t much of a call,” Wiener said. When someone suggested to him that it really was a pretty good call, Wiener replied: “Well, I tried. They were moving so fast. You do what you can.”

The play began with two seconds left on the clock and the ball on the 40-yard line of Trinity. Just before the snap, Wiener’s color analyst, Justin Thompson, finished a Wiener thought by suggesting that the offense might have to “start lateraling.”

Moments later, after quarterback Blake Barmore completed a pass to Shawn Thompson, the players began to throw the ball to each other, either sideways or backward but never forward (which would have been illegal). Riley Curry ran it into the end zone after catching the last lateral, which bounced, at the Millsaps 34.

Seven players touched the ball, including two offensive linemen. Wiener mentioned all the players, except the linemen, who did not hold the ball long enough to be recognized. Wiener also kept track of the ball’s position on the field. “He’s going to throw it to Thompson; Thompson at the 30-yard line; Thompson now laterals it back to Curry at the 35; they’re running out of spaces; Curry fakes; he’s going to lateral it.”

Wiener’s voice increased in volume and pitch only after Thompson — the color analyst and brother of the original pass-catcher Shawn Thompson — began to shout. And then Wiener, too, began to shout, like Russ Hodges at the Polo Grounds.

“CURRY SCORES! THE GAME IS OVER!” he shouted, continuing, “THE TIGERS LATERALED IT AND KEPT LATERALING! AND THE GAME IS OVER! THE TIGERS WIN! THE TIGERS WIN!”

“OH, MY GOODNESS!” he added.

Wiener said he had not planned to cover the game but decided to stop in Jackson while returning from a journalism convention in Washington. The game just happened to be played in his hometown, a few minutes from his parents’ house.

His mother picked him up at the airport and dropped him off at the field before kickoff. Along with his major in English, Wiener is studying for a minor in communications.

Wiener said he had a native Mississippian’s love of Faulkner and read “Absalom, Absalom!” last summer while doing an internship as a basketball writer for Slam magazine in New York.

He said he would start reading Faulkner’s “Go Down, Moses” this week while preparing to announce Saturday’s home game against Centre College of Kentucky.

Faulkner, by the way, did a little sports reporting, too. In 1955, he wrote an impressionistic essay about a hockey game at Madison Square Garden for Sports Illustrated. Faulkner described the movement of players in a game between the Rangers and the Montreal Canadiens as “bizarre and paradoxical, like the frantic darting of the weightless bugs which run on the surface of stagnant pools.”

In other words, hockey to Faulkner looked sort of like the football play that Wiener described Saturday in Mississippi.

Free Reading…

Interesting links/articles…

A death in the family…

What’s wrong with The office and how to fix it…

Ingredients of a family fortune…

Free tacos for everyone…

Steven Colbert’s Op-ed…

The 51 best magazines ever…

Free my phone…

The trouble wth Indie Rock…

Inside college sport’s biggest money machine…

100 reasons you are still single…

100 icebreakers to avoid…

The greatest Papelbon story ever told…

Wealthy colleges questioned about costs…

What’s wrong with Boston sports fans…

Crank Dat Soulja Boy…

Designing for a disaster…

The future of Tigerade…

Is Steven Colbert breaking the law?

DC’s inequality…

Friedmanland…

How the NFL season resembles your Netflix que…

Facebook Chooses Microsoft

On Wednesday, Facebook announced its decision to allow Microsoft to invest $240 million in exchange for a 1.6 percent stake in its company. While this certainly does not give Microsoft any increased control over Facebook, it does lend some credence to the worth of the company, which is now estimated at $15 billion. That’s right, a company run by a 23 year old, with only $150 million in projected revenues, is worth $15 billion.

Where are these future additional revenues going to come from? Well, there has been talk about the applications that are being added each day, but advertising has long been Facebook’s weak point, consistently being one of the worst performing sites on the Web:

As one person pointed out, the valuation does seem high when considering current traffic levels.

$15Billion valuation at 42million registered users comes out to over $300 per user. Now let’s say Facebook earns a VERY healthy $5CPM and we assume a 33% sellthru.
That means to recoup the investment, a user would have to log in every day and have 50 page views per day would take over 9 years to make their money back.

Here is what the recent trend looks like…the valuation clearly assumes traffic levels wll quadruple in a rather short period of time.

The New York Times reports:

“What’s significant is how much money Facebook is raising and what it wants to do with it. Facebook took $250 million from Microsoft and hinted that it is looking to raise more. It said it wants to grow from 300 to 700 employees. And it defined its business as “social computing.”

This is a signal that the company wants to take on Google, at least in some realms, by having a battalion of engineers developing original technology. That’s very different from most Web 2.0 companies that pride themselves on using a handful of engineers to do quick, lightweight front ends. And it’s different from MySpace, the other big social network, which is adding media content but can’t seem to improve its central technology.

… [Mark Zuckerberg] talked about how his role models—like many in his generation– are Steve Jobs of Apple and Google’s founders, Larry Page and Sergey Brin. They weren’t chastened by the excesses of the Internet bubble and have been rewarded for thinking big.

Mr. Zuckerberg, at least, has earned the right to at least consider thinking big. Facebook has risen above hundreds of rivals through a good sense of how to please users and an excellent approach to technology. Anyone who lived through the first crash would have simply cashed in his chips at this point. But Mr. Zuckerberg is doubling down.”

Clearly Google lost out on this one, though it probably is more of a loss for Yahoo than anyone else.

That doesn’t mean Google isn’t ticked off:

“Yesterday, in a conversation with reporters, Google co-founder Sergey Brin was asked whether he thought there were similarities between Facebook and Google in its early days.

A somewhat flip Mr. Brin responded: “I think the location was somewhat similar.” Facebook is in Palo Alto, across University Avenue from the former home of Google.

Mr. Brin was more serious when it came to highlighting the differences between the two companies. “We really started to grow (Google) during the bust of the dot com bubble,” he said. “Their timing may be somewhat inverted.” Google, he said, benefited from the discipline imposed on it by the bust. “I think that’s an extra challenge that they face,” he added.

One way that challenge is likely to play out is that Facebook will have to get more creative to offer prospective employees a shot at the same kind of Internet riches that Google afforded to hundreds, if not thousands, of its early employees.”

However, tenured Google employees are already leaving for Facebook, looking to cash out their stock options and strike while Facebook is hot. According to tech reporter Josh Quittner, Benjamin Ling, one of Brin’s “Golden Boys” and a top engineer, is leaving Google for Facebook.

With Google promising to increase its focus on social applications, this battle is just beginning.

Colbert in ‘08

Steven Colbert, beloved comedian, a man who does not see race, a man who has his own eagle mascot (albeit Canadian) , and who is not afraid to pose in front of a portrait of himself (posing as himself in front of himself, in front of himself…), has declared himself a presidential candidate…in South Carolina.  He will be running in his home state on both tickets, as a Democrat and a Republican, a strategy he does concede “may allow him to lose twice”.

Here is the clip of Colbert filling out his paperwork.

Colbert in ‘08 has become a rallying cry for those who are fed up with the current candidates, would like to see a third party candidate, or, let’s face it, can’t get enough of what is by all accounts the greatest American (no, seriously, google “the greatest American” and see who shows up - and we all know google cannot lie). 

So how serious is his candidacy? Well, grassroots campaigning has already begun, as indicated by the social meter that is Facebook.  The group “1,000,000 Strong for Steven T. Colbert” as of this posting has 867,083 members.  Not impressed?  Consider that “1,000,000 Strong for Obama” has been around for a year, yet its group total of some 381,000 was passed by Colbert’s group in less than four days.

Yesterday’s Rasmussen survey indicates his support is picking up as well.  As a third party candidate, a remarkable 13% of voters gave him the nod over frontrunners Hillary Clinton and Rudolph Guiliani.  We claim this race is over, and that Hillary is already planning her redecorations of the Oval Office, but that was pre-Colbert.  This is a whole new political force to reckon with.

The Washington Post reported on Colbert’s campaign this week that Public Opinion Strategies, another polling firm, found the following:

In the Democratic primary, Colbert takes 2.3 percent of the vote — good for fifth place behind Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (40 percent), Sen. Barack Obama (19 percent), former Sen. John Edwards (12 percent) and Sen. Joe Biden (2.7 percent. Colbert finished ahead of Gov. Bill Richardson (2.1 percent), Rep. Dennis Kucinich (2.1 percent) and former Sen. Mike Gravel (less than 1 percent).

Wow, Bill Richardson.  You are behind a comedian…I don’t think your campaign manager is laughing too hard now.

What is Colbert’s  platform, you might ask?  Well, according to the Washington Post coverage:

He’s ticked that Georgia is known as the Peach State even though, he contends, South Carolina grows more peaches. He’s worried about Chinese shrimp imports hurting his home-state fishermen. And, he adds out of nowhere, “we shouldn’t fall prey to the homosexual agenda.

I’m sure he’ll build on that.  But really, won’t this already speak to the primary voters in South Carolina more than what the other candidates have promised?

Like many, I am looking forward to Steven Colbert’s participation in any future debates.  The other candidates may practice truthiness, but at least let’s hear from the candidate that coined the word.

http://www.colbert08.org/

———————————————————————————————–  

For a side of Colbert you hardly ever see, watch his interview with Larry King:

Cannonball Run

 

(click map to enlarge)

Manhattan to Santa Monica.  In 32 hours.  Averaging 90.1 miles per hour and with 0 pee stops.

Sounds impossible?  Read about it here.

Looney Wars

Ah, World War II. A time of patriotism, American military prowness, sacrifice, and…Looney Tunes featuring Hitler.

Because if these didn’t get eight year olds to buy defense bonds, nothing would have.

Capitalist Heroes

Capitalist Heroes
By David Kelley

Fifty years ago today [Oct.10] Ayn Rand published her magnum opus, Atlas Shrugged. It’s an enduringly popular novel - all 1,168 pages of it - with some 150,000 new copies still sold each year in bookstores alone. And it’s always had a special appeal for people in business. The reasons, at least on the surface, are obvious enough.

Businessmen are favorite villains in popular media, routinely featured as polluters, crooks and murderers in network TV dramas and first-run movies, not to mention novels. Oil company CEOs are hauled before congressional committees whenever fuel prices rise, to be harangued and publicly shamed for the sin of high profits. Genuine cases of wrongdoing like Enron set off witch hunts that drag in prominent achievers like Frank Quattrone and Martha Stewart.

By contrast, the heroes in Atlas Shrugged are businessmen - and women. Rand imbues them with heroic, larger-than-life stature in the Romantic mold, for their courage, integrity and ability to create wealth.

They are not the exploiters but the exploited: victims of parasites and predators who want to wrap the producers in regulatory chains and expropriate their wealth.

Rand’s perspective is a welcome relief to people who more often see themselves portrayed as the bad guys, and so it is no wonder it has such enthusiastic fans in the upper echelons of business as Ed Snider (Comcast Spectacor, Philadelphia Flyers and 76ers), Fred Smith (Federal Express), John Mackey (Whole Foods), John A. Allison (BB&T), and Kevin O’Connor (DoubleClick) - not to mention thousands of others who pursue careers at every level in the private sector.

Yet the deeper reasons why the novel has proved so enduringly popular have to do with Rand’s moral defense of business and capitalism. Rejecting the centuries-old, and still conventional, piety that production and trade are just “materialistic,” she eloquently portrayed the spiritual heart of wealth creation through the lives of the characters now well known to many millions of readers.

Hank Rearden, the innovator resented and opposed by the others in his field, has not created a new type of music, like Mozart; rather he struggled for 10 years to perfect a revolutionary metal alloy that he hoped would make him a great deal of money. Dagny Taggart is a gifted and courageous woman who leads a campaign - not to defend France from England on the battlefield, like Joan of Arc - but to manage a transcontinental railroad and, against impossible odds, to build a new branch line critical for the survival of her corporation. Francisco d’Anconia, the enormously talented heir to an international copper company, poses as an idle, worthless playboy to cover up his secret operations - not to rescue people from the French Revolution, like the Scarlet Pimpernel - but to rescue industrialists from exploitation by ruthless Washington kleptocrats.

Economists have known for a long time that profits are an external measure of the value created by business enterprise. Rand portrayed the process of creating value from the inside, in the heroes’ vision and courage, their rational exuberance in meeting the challenges of production. Her point was stated by one of the minor characters of “Atlas,” a musical composer: “Whether it’s a symphony or a coal mine, all work is an act of creating and comes from the same source: from an inviolate capacity to see through one’s own eyes. … That shining vision which they talk about as belonging to the authors of symphonies and novels - what do they think is the driving faculty of men who discovered how to use oil, how to run a mine, how to build an electric motor?”

As for the charge, from egalitarian left and religious right alike, that the profit motive is selfish, Rand agreed. She was notorious as the advocate of “the virtue of selfishness,” as she titled a later work. Her moral defense of the pursuit of self-interest, and her critique of self-sacrifice as a moral standard, is at the heart of the novel. At the same time, she provides a scathing portrait of what she calls “the aristocracy of pull”: businessmen who scheme, lie and bribe to win favors from government.

Economists have also known for a long time that trade is a positive sum game, yet most defenders of capitalism still wrestle with the “paradox” posed in the 18th century by Adam Ferguson and Adam Smith: how private vice can produce public good, how the pursuit of self-interest yields benefits for all. Rand cut that Gordian knot in the novel by denying that the pursuit of self-interest is a vice. Precisely because trade is not a zero-sum game, Rand challenges the age-old moral view that one must be either a giver or a taker.

The central action of Atlas is the strike of the producers, their withdrawal from a society that depends on them to sustain itself and yet denounces them as morally inferior. Very well, says their leader, John Galt, we will not burden you further with what you see as our immoral and exploitative actions. The strike is of course a literary device; Rand herself described it as “a fantastic premise.” But it has a real and vital implication.

While it is true enough that free production and exchange serve “the public interest” (if that phrase has any real meaning), Rand argues that capitalism cannot be defended primarily on that ground. Capitalism is inherently a system of individualism, a system that regards every individual as an end in himself. That includes the right to live for himself, a right that does not depend on benefits to others, not even the mutual benefits that occur in trade.

This is the lesson that most people in business have yet to learn from Atlas, no matter how much they may love its portrayal of the passion and the glory possible in business enterprise. At a crucial point in the novel, the industrialist Hank Rearden is on trial for violating an arbitrary economic regulation.

Instead of apologizing for his pursuit of profit or seeking mercy on the basis of philanthropy, he says, “I work for nothing but my own profit - which I make by selling a product they need to men who are willing and able to buy it. I do not produce it for their benefit at the expense of mine, and they do not buy it for my benefit at the expense of theirs; I do not sacrifice my interests to them nor do they sacrifice theirs to me; we deal as equals by mutual consent to mutual advantage - and I am proud of every penny that I have earned in this manner…”

We will know the lesson of Atlas Shrugged has been learned when business people, facing accusers in Congress or the media, stand up like Rearden for their right to produce and trade freely, when they take pride in their profits and stop apologizing for creating wealth.

Adams Morgan Scenes

(flickr: christopherskillman, krisetya, furcafe, latur)

Midnight Madness

Friday night was Midnight Madness for Georgetown’s basketball team, the kickoff to what should be an absolutely terrific season. Sadly, this is the first one that I have missed, but I suppose I have to grow out of it sometime (ok, so actually, the growth of the program enabled only students who lined up at 5pm to get in…).

The team has high expectations for the year, and is already projected to be ranked anywhere from 5th to 8th in the preseason polls. However, with the 7′2″ Experience returning as well as four out of five starters, plus two All-Americans, I would say a title run is in order, and well within reach. Thankfully JTIII has received a six year contract extension, for the man deserves all the credit in the world for reviving the program.

Midnight Madness takes place all over the country at big program schools, and even though ESPN chose to broadcast Georgetown’s live, none have the intimate feel that McDonough Gymnasium can offer. The cavernous Verizon Center may be our main venue for home games, but it is always great to see the players introduced in front of 2,000 screaming students. Georgetown has also used MM and its showcase of our rich basketball heritage and devotion to the program to impress recruits, and many have committed after the event. This year’s may have been the stacked of all, as Greg Monroe, the #1 recruit in the country, along with twenty other recruits, were in attendance.

The festivities Friday night included dunking, a three point contest, unveiling our 2007 Final Four banner, as well as hanging Jeff Green’s jersey up to celebrate his joining of the NBA. But the best highlight must have been when Jerry Rice, the great 49ers’ wide reciever, was introduced, and Patrick Ewing Jr taught him the ‘Soulja Boy’ dance. Jerry Rice’s daughter is a sophomore at Georgetown and he particpated in “Dancing with the Stars” so perhaps it was only appropriate.

Here is the video:

Much more videos of the entire event can be found here.

I love that Roy Hibbert, who last year chose to do a Kevin Garnett entrance (clapping the chalk), spent his introduction jumping into the stands with the students, walking through them and high fiving all the way. For someone who gave up guaranteed millions as a lottery pick to return to give Georgetown a chance at a national title, it is great to see him as humble as ever and let them show their enthusiasm and thanks.

The euphoria certainly wasn’t lost on Greg Monroe, who announced a day later he would commit to Georgetown, before even visiting his other schools, Duke and UConn. Just incredible. A 6′10″ 17 year old, with excellent grades, demeanor, excellent defense and unusually strong passing skills, the #1 recruit in the nation…what more could we have asked for? He will fit in perfectly in JTIII’s Princeton offense, and if a Final Four appearance didn’t announce Hoya Paranoia is back, this committment has.

Here is ESPN’s summary:

With more consistent effort, Greg Monroe could eventually emerge as the best player from the ‘08 class.
Monroe has the ability to easily perform every task on the basketball court, much in the same manner in which Lamar Odom, another left-handed combo-forward, does for the Los Angeles Lakers. Monroe has smooth footwork and post moves, which allows him to easily score on the block, seeming just as comfortable facing up in the post or playing with his back to the basket. Despite his size, Monroe has the ability to consistently knock down perimeter jump shots with range that extends out to 15-17 feet. He has very good lateral quickness and surprisingly deft ball-handling skills for a player of his height.
Monroe places immense pressure on the opposition due to the match-up problems that he presents. When guarded by a bigger, slower post-player, Monroe uses his quickness to drive past the defender on the perimeter. If defended by a smaller perimeter player, Monroe can move into the post to exploit the size differential. He also runs the floor very well and has good leaping ability. Monroe also has very impressive vision and passing skills. He effectively rebounds the ball on both on the both ends of the court. Monroe also contests, alters and blocks shots on defense. If he plays with a high level on intensity on a consistent basis, increases his strength and adds muscle to his frame, Monroe will quickly evolve into an NBA-level prospect.
Due to his vast array of skills, Georgetown will utilize Monroe in a variety of ways. Monroe’s vision, passing skills and mobility will fit perfectly with JT3’s quick, motion offense that relies on passing, precision and teamwork. Monroe’s future teammates will find themselves on the receiving end of many outstanding passes, due to Monroe’s unselfish style of play and knack for spotting open teammates. The Hoyas will lose All-American center Roy Hibbert to graduation and will look to Monroe to help fill the considerable interior scoring void.

With Hibbert’s development over his four-year stint at Georgetown, JT3 has shown that he knows how to develop interior players similar to the way his father developed post players during the Golden Age of Georgetown Basketball, and Monroe will greatly benefit from Thompson III’s tutelage. Monroe has the lateral quickness and foot speed to run in Georgetown’s up-tempo offensive attack. Monroe will provide the Hoyas with shot-blocking ability and will learn to become a better defender while playing for Georgetown. In fact, he will initiate many fastbreaks by blocking a shot or grabbing a defensive rebound, running down the court and finishing on the offensive end. With the freedom to move from the perimeter to the post that the motion offense provides, Monroe will have a chance to showcase both his post-play ability and perimeter skills. Monroe gives the Hoyas with another ball-handler, making it increasingly difficult to press them. Along with current forwards DaJuan Summers and Vernon Macklin, Monroe will give John Thompson III the opportunity to attack the opposition with multiple alignments and use the high-low game to his advantage.
Monroe becomes the fourth prospect to commit to Georgetown, joining fellow ESPN 150 recruits 6-3 combo-guard Jason Clark (Arlington, Va.), 6-10 C Henry Sims (Baltimore, Md.) and 6-9 PF Chris Braswell (Chatham, Va.). With Monroe, Braswell, and Sims, the Hoyas have the chance to go big and play Monroe at the small forward spot. Monroe’s inside-outside game will mesh perfectly with the physical style of play that Braswell utilizes, allowing Monroe to play on the perimeter and use his considerable offensive skills on smaller perimeter players. Monroe, with his passing and shooting ability, can play on the perimeter and the Hoyas can run high-low sets with Monroe and Sims on offense.
With all three prospects having great shot-blocking ability and length, Georgetown will create defensive nightmares for the opposition when they attempt to score. With their propensity to block shots and rebounds, this impressive trio should provide plenty of extra scoring chances for the Hoyas through their defense. This collection of interior depth should remind Georgetown fans of the plethora of interior players that played on the 1984 National Championship team that featured Patrick Ewing and Michael Graham and the Alonzo Mourning/Dikembe Mutumbo teams of the early ’90s. Adding the explosive Clark to the equation gives JT3 the talented guard that flawlessly complements such great interior depth and will help lead the Hoyas on more deep NCAA Tournament runs in the very near future.

Here is the schedule for the season:

11/10/07 vs. William & Mary Verizon Center 12:00 p.m. ET
11/15/07 vs. Michigan Verizon Center 7:30 p.m. ET
11/21/07 at Ball State Worthen Arena 7:00 p.m. ET
11/28/07 at Old Dominion Convocation Center 7:00 p.m. ET
12/01/07 vs. Fairfield Verizon Center 1:00 p.m. ET
12/05/07 at Alabama Birmingham Civic Center 7:00 p.m. ET
12/09/07 vs. Jacksonville Verizon Center 1:00 p.m. ET
12/15/07 vs. Radford McDonough Aren 7:30 p.m. ET
12/22/07 at Memphis Fedex Forum 12:00 p.m. ET
12/29/07 vs. American Verizon Center 1:00 p.m. ET
12/31/07 vs. Fordham Verizon Center 2:00 p.m. ET
01/05/08 at Rutgers Rutgers Athletic Center 2:00 p.m. ET
01/08/08 at DePaul Allstate Arena 12:00 p.m. ET
01/12/08 vs. Connecticut Verizon Center 2:00 p.m. ET
01/14/08 at Pittsburgh Petersen Center 7:00 p.m. ET
01/19/08 vs. Notre Dame Verizon Center 12:00 p.m. ET
01/21/08 vs. Syracuse Verizon Center 7:00 p.m. ET
01/26/08 at West Virginia Morgantown 7:00 p.m. ET
01/30/08 at St. John’s MSG 7:00 p.m. ET
02/02/08 vs. Seton Hall Verizon Center 12:00 p.m. ET
02/05/08 vs. USF Verizon Center 7:30 p.m. ET
02/09/08 at Louisville Freedom Hall 9:00 p.m. ET
02/11/08 vs. Villanova Verizon Center 7:00 p.m. ET
02/16/08 at Syracuse Carrier Dome 12:00 p.m. ET
02/18/08 at Providence Dunkin Donuts 4:00 p.m. ET
02/23/08 vs. Cincinnati Verizon Center 12:00 p.m. ET
02/27/08 vs. St. John’s Verizon Center 9:00 p.m. ET
03/01/08 at Marquette Bradley Center 2:00 p.m. ET
03/08/08 vs. Louisville Verizon Center 12:00 p.m. ET

Football, or lack therof

I came across this in the New York Times. Sure, I know about it, but the fact that now it can become water cooler talk by more than already boastful Ivy League grads sucks.

We used to be in the Orange Bowl. That’s right, Mississippi State vs. Georgetown, 1941. Look it up if you don’t believe me.

I know President DeGoia is a former footballer, but really, DC is not a great recruiting area, we have no facilities (nor the room for them if we tried) and our academic standards don’t exactly scream football school. Yeah, we aren’t Notre Dame (thank god) but it doesn’t look like former assistant Navy coach Kevin Kelly can call more than a couple of plays. I’ll give it time but losing 100-7 in two weekends makes me think this is not heading the right direction. As a former swimmer, I hate to see all that money spent on scholarships and equipment with essentially a negative return, when so many other sports could use even a fifth of the money to thrive.

Thank god Midnight Madness is upon us at last. Memphis, watch out. PE JR and the big fella know no mercy.

The Sagging Middle

WSJ David Wessel

You don’t need to be a Ph.D. economist to know something big is happening in the job market.

The salaries of Wall Street’s financial engineers are surging while wages in industrial companies stagnate. Manufacturers complain about “skill shortages” while cutting payrolls. The number of health-care jobs soars 45% over 15 years, outstripping the 25% increase in other jobs. Computers seem to have infiltrated every job, yet demand for unskilled, low-wage immigrants doesn’t abate.

For decades, employers in the U.S. and other industrialized countries sought more skilled workers as technology and the availability of low-wage workers abroad diminished the employers’ appetite for lesser-skilled workers at home. It was painful, but simple: Employers of all sorts wanted more skills and more education, and paid more to get them.

How do you think the U.S. job market is changing? Should the government do anything to respond to those changes?
It is no longer that simple. Cue the Ph.D. economists.

There is still strong demand for high-end workers — the stars of finance, software, law, sports and entertainment — as well as for the highest-skilled factory workers. The only news is the intensity of that demand, which is pushing up pay for those at the top.

But — and here’s the switch — demand is increasing for some workers at the low end of the pay scale: the ones who wipe brows in hospitals, care for kids, clear tables at bistros and stand guard in office-building lobbies. In 1980, about 13% of workers without any college education were working in such personal-service jobs, according to calculations by David Autor, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology economist. In 2005, 20% of them were.

The losers? “The sagging middle,” says Princeton University economist Alan Krueger.

As Harvard economists Lawrence Katz and Claudia Goldin put it recently, “U.S. employment has been polarizing into high-wage and low-wage jobs at the expense of traditional middle-class jobs.”

Here’s the hypothesis evolving among these and other academics. Technology and globalization are boosting demand for the most-educated workers, those prized for abstract or conceptual skills. Top hedge-fund managers aren’t being replaced by computers; they’re harnessing them, to their great profit.

By contrast, technology and globalization are eroding demand for workers who do routine tasks in factories and offices, many of whom are high-school or even college grads. The voice-mail system does away with switchboard operators; back-office software eliminates bookkeepers; robots replace assembly-line workers. Or the work is shipped overseas to a foreign factory or an office linked to the U.S. by fiber-optic cables.

But technology and globalization are not eroding demand for personal-service workers. Those tasks can’t be done by computer or shipped offshore. The services have to be delivered here in the U.S. — and in person — either by natives or by immigrants.

Indeed, as the folks at the top make more money, more of them want nannies, gardeners, personal trainers and gourmet chefs. These workers are indirect beneficiaries of the upward flow of wealth.Their wages have been rising while those of midlevel factory and office workers, though still higher than those of many service employees, are stagnating.

Dissecting data on 741 American communities, MIT’s Mr. Autor and colleague David Dorn examined places that were particularly heavy with easy-to-automate or easy-to-outsource jobs in 1980. By 2005, they discovered, wage inequality in those communities had widened more than elsewhere. The erosion of jobs and wages in the middle coincided with increasing employment and wages for personal-service workers at the bottom of the income ladder and highly educated workers at the top.

Some economists speculate that the same economic forces are at play in Europe, but are hidden because rules and customs that restrain incomes at the top also restrain demand for personal-service workers at the bottom. That means less inequality than in the U.S., but also fewer jobs overall and more people on the sidelines, the ones who would be service workers if there were jobs to be had.

So what, if anything, should the U.S. do about this? That’s a harder question.

Economists warn that shoring up the middle by shielding manufacturing industries from imports or otherwise meddling with the market would cost consumers heavily. Some, certainly not all, suggest letting the market be, and using the tax code to transfer money from the biggest winners. Others suggest “professionalizing” personal-service jobs, perhaps encouraging unionization, to boost wages. Unlike factory jobs, advocates reason, these jobs can’t be moved offshore or automated if employers have to pay more.

The more popular solution — at least among economists — is a familiar one: Educate all workers so they are better at interpersonal or abstract skills (the jobs of the future) as opposed to dial-turning or keyboard-pounding (rapidly disappearing jobs of the past).

Movie Mayhem

I have been meaning to see a lot of movies in the theater lately, and thanks to a certain incident at the Georgetown Loews theater, I was able to see two for the price of one this weekend.

I had heard some strong recommendations from friends to see the new Clooney flick Michael Clayton, so even though I was dying to see Eastern Promises, I went with my brother to the 7:30 showing. Well, without giving it away, the premise of the movie is a thriller (even though it pans out as the anti-Grisham movie), so half an hour in the audience (including myself) are locked up in suspense. I am surprised to see a couple enter the theater so late, but try to focus on the film.

However, they make their way towards the upper reaches of the cinema, and spot an empty seat directly in front of me. The man, about fifty years old, holds his wife’s hand and excuses his way through the aisle, much to the dismay of in our vicinity. He stops short at the empty seat, where a young man about my age is sitting in between it and another empty seat to his right. The husband asks the man to move over a seat, so he and his wife cna sit together, but he answers with a curt, “No,” and continues to wach the film. The man asks again, this time in a more angered tone, but receives the same response.

At this point he pulls out the sympathy card, telling him, “I just picked up my wife from the hospital. That is why I am late.” The young man proceeds to be engrossed in the movie, or perhaps just in George Clooney himself. The husband then pleads, “Please. She feels very sick. I want to be next to her in case she needs to throw up.”

At this point the charade had taken up several minutes, and the crowd around us grew restless, and those in the front stole glances at the commotion above. I was with the husband until that last comment, and was even contemplating giving up my seat, but this was too much. His wife, a waifish figure, was indeed holding her hand to her mouth, and did not look well at all. Which, needless to say, made me not want to put them directly behind me. Meanwhile, the three people further down the same row in question became disgruntled, and asked the man to sit down so we could watch the movie. There was a woman closest to the man, who must have said something that disgreed with him, because he immediately shot back a retort, although all I heard was, “Is this your wife?”. The woman then became really upset, and got up, to complain. As soon as she did, the man took her seat, and his wife sat down next to him. She then started yelling at the man with the sick wife, demanding her seat back, but he wouldn’t budge, and then her and her friends got up and headed to the exit, complaining of harassment.

A couple of minutes later, a cinema employee walked in and they pointed out the row where they had been sitting, but the employee did not do anything, perhaps realizing he would cause a commotion (or more thanthere was already - the one guy seriously looked like he was ready to clock the older man, ill wife be damned). The friends went back to their seats, but still visibly upset at the situation, and the woman did not have her seat back. They loudly remarked that they would get the police and press charges on the man. The man and his wife, meanwhile, were trying to watch the movie (which, by the way, between coming late and the drama unfolding before us, they could not possibly have understood). The wife, though, was bent over, her hands covering her mouth, emitting strange coughs and occasionally sounding like she was one heave short of letting a meal fly over her unfortunate forward seatmate’ head. This, and the strong remarks that continued be let loose by the woman and her friend’s resulted in pained looks towards our area, and by the time a cinema manager entered the theater anything Michael Clayton was resolving on screen could not match that which was taking place right there in the theater seats. Moments later three(!) DC Metro police entered, and asked that the man and his wife join them downstairs. The man escorted his coughing wife down the stairs, and we turned our attention back to the film.

As we left our seats, I heard two girls in front of me discussing what happend, and since they clearly were ignorant in what had caused such a disturbance, I gave them an executive summary, which only prompted looks of disbelief. As we reached the hallway, two thearter attendents were handed out free movie vouchers, as the manager profusely apologized for what went down. But we all decided for the extraordinary prices now being charged ($9.50 even using my expired student ID!), even something as disturbing as what we went through was worth the extra movie.

I ended up the following day seeing Into The Wild, the Sean Penn film based on the bestselling Jon Krakauer book by the same name. As a big fan of On The Road, I really liked this movie, even if it did drag on a bit at parts. Think road trip meets Man Vs. Wild, with great cinematography…what’s not to like?

I want to read the book now, which intersperses other adventure stories in with that of Christopher McCandless.

Here is the article that was the start of it all, although I feel like going into the movie blind made it more sensational.

Movie Grade:

Into the Wild A- A film that definitely will speak to people and stick with them after they have left the theater.
Michael Clayton B+ Well made, well acted. Takes a different slant and manages to hold audience.

Next up: Darjeeling Limited, Eastern Promises, and November 2nd, Bee Movie of course.

Punch Drunk Love

Drunk people are hilarious…

h/t Mac G’s World.

Josh Ritter

Yesterday night I went to the 930 Club to see Josh Ritter, an up and coming artist who is drawing comparisons to songwriting legends Paul Simon, Bob Dylan, and Bruce Springsteen. I came across his album Animal Years a while back, and was immediately drawn to his bare style and imaginative lyrics. His previous albums, such as Hello Starling, are grounded in a much more folk motif, but with this years’ The Historical Conquests of Josh Ritter, he has branched out to a style more reminescent of the alternative genre, while still reminding his listeners of his roots. His rise in the US coincided in a large part with “Girl in the War”, a song that takes a unique look at the side of a young man whose love is the one in the face of danger.

An Idaho boy, Josh never intended to become a musician, instead studying to become a neurologist like his parents. But while in college he bought a guitar at a KMart, and began composing. What is tantalizing is that he is still finding himself as an artist, despite his critical aclaim (Paste claims, “Put simply, Ritter is the most gifted interpreter of Americana, as an arranger and a lyricist, working today.”) He just learned to play the piano, and is beginning to dwelve in different genres, introducing rock infused drums and electric guitar, and the brass and sax of jazz, into his most recent work.

But what Ritter does that places him above his peers is write lyrics that tell a story and cleverly capture raw emotion. In “The Temptation of Adam”, he recounts his apocalyptic encounter with love:

I never had to learn to love her like I learned to love the Bomb
She just came along and started to ignore me
As we waited for the Big One
I started singing her my songs
And I think she started feeling something for me

We passed the time with crosswords that she thought to bring inside
What five letters spell “apocalypse” she asked me
I won her over saying “W.W.I.I.I.”
We smiled and we both knew that she’d misjudged me

The show itself at the 930 Club was a real treat, as Josh Ritter performed almost all of his hits, totaling over an hour and a half. A novice to the venue, I was barely 15 feet away, and felt the intimate feel of the packed house served his performance well. However, he claimed that this was the largest venue he had ever performed at, and seemed to be having the time of his life. Much of his previous years were spent touring, especially abroad, where he has a strong following, and he still seems starstuck with his success. NPR was broadcasting the performance live as well, so hopefully more fans will follow. Ritter entertained in between songs by recounting stories from his Idaho roots, providing some insight into the inspiration for his songs.

Here is an interview with the DCist prior to the concert.

Here are two clips, many more can be found online. The first is the upbeat “To the Dogs or Whoever”, and the second is the more mellow “Girl in the War”.

Cheating

What a year for sports do far. And not in the good way.

I was watching Marion Jones’ tearful apology yesterday on TV, and realized that cheating is so widespread in sports nowadays, it is a wonder athletes even feel compelled to apologize at all. Everyone seems to be doing it, and if these are the role models for those with aspirations, we could be in a lot of trouble.

Let’s begin with baseball, the American sport. From Jackie Robinson breaking the color barrier to the mighty Yankee teams to the great home run chase in 1998, this was supposed to be a sport that inspired and reflected the values that we hold so sacred to our heritage. But now the past is just shrouded in a mist of controversy and unsettling discoveries that leave us wincing as even the most pressing of questions are being answered.

We know Cameneti, the AL MVP, did steroids, and paid with his life. Jose Conseco told us steriod use was widespread. Baseball, and us, turned a blind eye. Then came the suspected users, and the BALCO investigation began. McGwire, a future hall of famer, went in front of Congress, and couldn’t deny using performance enhancing drugs. So testing began.

First it was the small fish, beginning with Alex Sanchez, an obscure pitcher for the lowly Devil Rays. Then MLB announced 38 minor leaguers tested positive, resulting in suspensions. Palmeiro, another potential hall of famer, denied using PEDs, wagging his finger at Congress, but tests found a serious steroid, stanozolol, in his system. Federal IRS agents raided pitcher Jason Grimsley’s home, collecting enough evidence to get Jason to name names. Those names? The best pichter of the last 30 years, Roger Clemens. The best shortstop in the game, Miguel Tejada. And a clutch postseaon veteran pitcher Andy Pettite. Not quite small fish at all, even if they were just names (for now).

Which brings us to 2007. Bond’s record breaking season, where he became baseball’s all time home run leader. And did anyone out of San Francisco care? Well, yes, because of the allegations of PED’s. We debated whether the commissoner should be present, whether Hank Aaron had an obligation to be there. While one of the most hallowed records in sports, Bond’s quest was not met with enthuasiasm, but disgust.

But there was a silver lining, in a player named Rick Ankiel. Once a promising young pitcher in the major leagues in 2000, one day he just couldn’t pitch anymore. Really. He hit batters left and right, throwing five wild pitches in one inning. Demoted to the minor leagues, he disappeared. And then there were rumours he was trying to make it as a hitter. This August, some seven years later after making his mark as a pitcher, he was called up by the Cardinals, and on his first day hit a three run homer. Two days later, he went 3-4 at the plate with two homers. As he slugged his way to a remarkable comeback, he was deemed “the Natural,” a true feel good story for the season. But then news broke that Ankiel received HGH shipments from January to December 2004. He claimed vehemently the drugs were prescribed for his recovery from Tommy John surgery, and technically baseball only banned HGH in 2005, but it was too late. This savior, this “natural”, was to many just another athlete who misled us and was willing to use drugs to get ahead.

The BALCO investigation led us Marion Jones, the Olympic sprinter who won five gold medals. She denied the charges, to the point of mocking the media. But this week she admitted to cheating, offering a tearful apology to the fans, her family, and her country. She gave up her medals, but the harm done to her sport, the USA, and her fellow competitors is irreparable. The feeling of earning a gold medal can not be emulated after the fact, and while her Olympic competitors may gain the medals back, it can only be a bittersweet justice.

Marion isn’t the only Olympic gold medalist accused of cheating. Justin Gaitlin, the gold medalist who tied the World Record time in the 100 m with a 9.77. But he, as well as seven other athletes under track coach Trevor Graham, have been found with illegal substances in their bloodstream. Gaitlin is currently serving an eight year ban from the sport. This spring, he tried out for the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, in an effort to be a wide receiver in the NFL.

Which is only appropriate, because if there is one sport that continues to ignore cheating, it is football. Players are getting bigger and faster, and its not just hard work that gets them there. Look at Bill Romanowksi, a linebacker who won four Super Bowls. A “nutrition nut,” He is best remembered for his on field altercations, no doubt fueled by the drugs he used. These included breaking a quarterback’s jaw, kicking a player in the head, spitting in a player’s face, tossing a football into a player’s groin, and even punching a teammate (dislocating his eye socket and ending his career). And his reward? He was deemed a perennial Pro Bowler and future Hall of Famer. He later admitted he did steroids and human growth hormone, supplied by Victor Conte, the same man identified by the FBI in the case against Bonds. Does this admission show up on his Wikipedia page? No, it passes over this issue entirely - largely reflective of the attitude the NFL has taken. Sure, they test players, and occasionally some get snared, such as the NFL defensive player of the year Shawn Merriman, or the Patriot’s Rodney Harrison. Merriman even missed 4 games last year due to serving out his penalty - yet was still voted into the Pro Bowl. If the league and the fans won’t hold players accountable for such actions, why should bother policing themselves? Any high school football player would admit that they witness fellow players taking performance enhancers, proving that it never is too early to start to valuing the rewards over the risk. Of course, there are other ways to cheat in the NFL, as the Patriots proved when they were caught videotaping the Jets. Once again, the NFL put their business interests first, by allowing the infractor (Coach Belichick) to remain on the sideline coaching for the entire season, and, when they requested all tapes be handed over, destroyed them all quickly, claiming there was nothing to see. (Huh? If that doesn’t reek of a coverup, I don’t know what would.)

The United States also managed to join the rest of the cycling community when Floyd Landis was found with illegal substances in his system after winning the Tour de France. While cycling greats Ivan Basso and Jan Ullrich were pulled from the Tour de France for doping, the US looked like it had the rare clean winners in Lance Armstrong and Landis. But no sooner were we celebrating his termendous achievement, then Landis, too, like all the others before him, was just another dirty winner. After mutiple appeals, all rejected, Landis as of today has only one more (in front of the Court of Arbitration for Sport) with which to clean his name.

The spotlight on the drugs these athletes abuse extends even to such sports as wrestling, where steroid use is considered part of the job. The tragic death of Chris Benoit, of whom I wrote about earlier, highlighted the deadly consequences these chemical imbalances could inccur, not only on the individual’s health, but those around them. This week an investigation discovered that the doctor had prescribed too high a dosage of steroids, which contributed the head trauma preceding Chris’ murder of his family and suicide. Vince McMahon, in the name of his entertainment business, has done next to nothing to provide awareness of the danger his entertainers/athletes may be in, while we continue to tune in on our TVs.

And it is not as if it is hard to get steroids. ESPN published a story this month, where they detailed their efforts to set up a phony supplements company to try to procure such performance enhancers. Once they got in touch with a supplier (Florida’s IDS Sports) they were quickly able to place an order for what the contact described as “highly androgenic”. Without even showing any identification whatsoever, and forking over $1,000, they were able to receive four boxes of drugs. As the contact promised, the drugs proved negative after even the most rigorous drug tests. LA’s Antu-Doping Research Institute finally took a look, and discovered that the drug, Sostonal, contained Madol, a powerful designer steroid originally developed by BALCO chemist Patrick Arnold. One industry expert claimed, “No one is making this stuff in the U.S. The only place you can get it is China.”

A damning accusation indeed, especially with the Olympics in Beijing ahead in 2008. China has been scrambling to clean up its city for the occasion, banning cars and having its offical Weather Manipulation Office seed the air with chemicals to lift the orange tint from its polluted skies, even if only for a couple of weeks. It has cracked down on drug labs, and issued a law making suppplying any athletes, coaches, or sports federation performance enhancing drugs illegal. We can take for granted that Beijing will not fully solve its pollution problems, but let’s hope their efforts on behalf of producing clean athletes is met with as much rigor.

The bottom line is that cheating in sports has too long been overlooked and forgiven. Track has taken itself seriously, but its athletes continue to be on the cutting edge of new drugs, and push the limits. Baseball still has no standard random blood testing, and largely lives off of its revival from the Home Run Chase years. The NFL rewards its players with Pro Bowls. Cycling is almost defunct as a sport, since the best cyclists are constantly the ones doping and being banned.

When a professor, or author, commits plagerism, punishment is rarely handed out. When a student does, he can be expelled. Students largely refrain from such behavior because of the lack of leverage, and the dire consequences they may face. But it is not in the best interest for universities to take the same stance with those that bring name recognition and money. Therin lies the danger, that students can tune into any sporting event and see the risks being taken and see the rewards so great. It may not happen in college, but at some point, they will be reminded of this lesson, and know that cheating is only wrong when caught, but is more commonplace than playing it straight. Students are taught to bring their talents to an even playing field, but in reality will come across ones that they know are not. And at that moment, knowing that cheating is becoming a way of life, they will make that choice based not on what they ethically believe to be right or wrong, but what the reward could very well be.

The Odyssey Years

The Odyssey Years By DAVID BROOKS

There used to be four common life phases: childhood, adolescence, adulthood and old age. Now, there are at least six: childhood, adolescence, odyssey, adulthood, active retirement and old age. Of the new ones, the least understood is odyssey, the decade of wandering that frequently occurs between adolescence and adulthood.

During this decade, 20-somethings go to school and take breaks from school. They live with friends and they live at home. They fall in and out of love. They try one career and then try another.

Their parents grow increasingly anxious. These parents understand that there’s bound to be a transition phase between student life and adult life. But when they look at their own grown children, they see the transition stretching five years, seven and beyond. The parents don’t even detect a clear sense of direction in their children’s lives. They look at them and see the things that are being delayed.

They see that people in this age bracket are delaying marriage. They’re delaying having children. They’re delaying permanent employment. People who were born before 1964 tend to define adulthood by certain accomplishments - moving away from home, becoming financially independent, getting married and starting a family.

In 1960, roughly 70 percent of 30-year-olds had achieved these things. By 2000, fewer than 40 percent of 30-year-olds had done the same.

Yet with a little imagination it’s possible even for baby boomers to understand what it’s like to be in the middle of the odyssey years. It’s possible to see that this period of improvisation is a sensible response to modern conditions.

Two of the country’s best social scientists have been trying to understand this new life phase. William Galston of the Brookings Institution has recently completed a research project for the Hewlett Foundation. Robert Wuthnow of Princeton has just published a tremendously valuable book, “After the Baby Boomers” that looks at young adulthood through the prism of religious practice.

Through their work, you can see the spirit of fluidity that now characterizes this stage. Young people grow up in tightly structured childhoods, Wuthnow observes, but then graduate into a world characterized by uncertainty, diversity, searching and tinkering. Old success recipes don’t apply, new norms have not been established and everything seems to give way to a less permanent version of itself.

Dating gives way to Facebook and hooking up. Marriage gives way to cohabitation. Church attendance gives way to spiritual longing. Newspaper reading gives way to blogging. (In 1970, 49 percent of adults in their 20s read a daily paper; now it’s at 21 percent.)

The job market is fluid. Graduating seniors don’t find corporations offering them jobs that will guide them all the way to retirement. Instead they find a vast menu of information economy options, few of which they have heard of or prepared for.

Social life is fluid. There’s been a shift in the balance of power between the genders. Thirty-six percent of female workers in their 20s now have a college degree, compared with 23 percent of male workers. Male wages have stagnated over the past decades, while female wages have risen.

This has fundamentally scrambled the courtship rituals and decreased the pressure to get married. Educated women can get many of the things they want (income, status, identity) without marriage, while they find it harder (or, if they’re working-class, next to impossible) to find a suitably accomplished mate.

The odyssey years are not about slacking off. There are intense competitive pressures as a result of the vast numbers of people chasing relatively few opportunities. Moreover, surveys show that people living through these years have highly traditional aspirations (they rate parenthood more highly than their own parents did) even as they lead improvising lives.

Rather, what we’re seeing is the creation of a new life phase, just as adolescence came into being a century ago. It’s a phase in which some social institutions flourish - knitting circles, Teach for America - while others - churches, political parties - have trouble establishing ties.

But there is every reason to think this phase will grow more pronounced in the coming years. European nations are traveling this route ahead of us, Galston notes. Europeans delay marriage even longer than we do and spend even more years shifting between the job market and higher education.

And as the new generational structure solidifies, social and economic entrepreneurs will create new rites and institutions. Someday people will look back and wonder at the vast social changes wrought by the emerging social group that saw their situations first captured by “Friends” and later by “Knocked Up.”

Tortured Logic

The lighter side

and

The darker side.

So Be It?
The dangers of defining “torture” down.
BY BRET STEPHENS (WSJ)

It all but goes without saying that torture, properly defined and in nearly every circumstance, is wrong. But what do you make of the following statement, from a recent editorial in the Economist: “Dozens of plots may have been foiled and thousands of lives saved as a result of some of the unsavory practices now being employed in the name of fighting terrorism. Dropping such practices in order to preserve freedom may cost many lives. So be it”? The subject of torture is again in the news thanks to a front-page story last week in the New York Times. It claims that in 2005 the Justice Department issued secret legal memorandums authorizing what the paper calls “severe interrogations,” even after the administration had apparently renounced such methods. President Bush responded to the Times’s story, as he has previously, by insisting “this government does not torture people.” But the editorial writers at the Times were not impressed: “Is this a nation,” they asked, “that tortures human beings and then concocts legal sophistries to confuse the world and avoid accountability before American voters?”Two significant questions arise from this debate. First, what do we really mean by the word “torture”? And second, is the “So be it” standard put forward by the Economist a persuasive one?

The first question is not just a hairsplitting one, although a lot of hair gets split when government lawyers are asked for their opinion. Torture is a word that preserves its moral force only when used precisely and consistently to denote uniquely barbarous acts. “The needle under the fingernail” is one example. Simply to mention it causes most people instinctively to shudder.

By contrast, “slaps to the head,” among the examples cited by the Times of the administration’s “brutal” methods, doesn’t come close to meeting any plausible definition of torture. The other examples–”hours held naked in a frigid [50 degree Fahrenheit] cell; days and nights without sleep while battered by thundering rock music; long periods manacled in stress positions; or the ultimate, waterboarding”–come progressively closer to the line, and perhaps they cross it. But how do we tell?

A useful benchmark was offered by a landmark 1978 decision laid down by the European Court of Human Rights. In Ireland v. the United Kingdom, which dealt with Britain’s (extrajudicial) treatment of members of the Irish Republican Army, the court concluded that the following methods did not amount to torture:

“(a) Wall-standing: Forcing the detainees to remain for periods of some hours in a ’stress position,’ described by those who underwent it as being ’spreadeagled against the wall, with their fingers put high above the head against the wall, the legs spread apart and the feet back, causing them to stand on their toes with the weight of the body mainly on the fingers.’

“(b) Hooding: Putting a black or navy colored bag over the detainees’ heads and, at least initially, keeping it there all the time except during interrogation.

“(c) Subjection to noise: Pending their interrogations, holding the detainees in a room where there was a continuous loud and hissing noise.

“(d) Deprivation of sleep: pending their interrogations, depriving the detainees of sleep.

“(e) Deprivation of food and drink: subjecting the detainees to a reduced diet during their stay at the center and pending interrogations.”

Remarkably, the European Court reached this careful judgment despite the fact that the “five techniques were applied in combination, with premeditation and for hours at a stretch” and that some of the detainees sustained “massive” injuries. The court’s reasoning wasn’t meant to excuse the behavior of British authorities, which it rightly described as “inhuman and degrading.” But by maintaining the “distinction between ‘torture’ and ‘inhuman or degrading treatment,’ ” the court sought to preserve the “special stigma [attached] to deliberate inhuman treatment causing very serious and cruel suffering.”

These distinctions are not “legal sophistries,” as the Times would have it. They are a juridical necessity to ensure that our definition of torture does not become so diluted as to render its prohibition unenforceable. But the abuse of the word does have its rhetorical uses: As with the militant anti-abortion movement, which believes that every abortion is murder and thus that every abortionist is a “murderer,” the Times editorialists and their fellow travelers would characterize anyone who favors so much as touching a hair on 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s head as “pro-torture.” This isn’t argument. It’s moral bullying.

For the record, count me as one who does not object to the interrogation to which KSM was reportedly subjected, including waterboarding. This is not because I take the use of waterboarding lightly (although I have a hard time concluding that a technique, however terrifying, to which CIA officers are willing to subject themselves experimentally can properly be counted as torture). It’s because I take the threat posed by KSM seriously.

That makes it difficult for me to subscribe to the “So be it” line of reasoning. Taken seriously, it says that the civilized world would be better off sustaining a nuclear 9/11 than tarnishing its good name, that righteous victimhood is a finer thing than an innocent life saved through morally compromised methods, and that self-preservation is not the most fundamental requirement of democratic life.

In nearly all conflicts, even existential ones, limits should be observed, and it’s worth thinking through where exactly the limits lie. But when the moral trade-off comes down to KSM waterboarded in order to extract actionable intelligence, or some mother’s child murdered, it’s not a tough call. And no amount of inflated, imprecise and tendentious allegations of torture should change that.

DC Metro

His slurpee must have spilled and distracted him…

                                                                                               flickr Bas 88

Free Reading…

Interesting articles/links…

Ranking our friends…

That great Full House episode…

Blowup dolls won’t do the trick…

A failed interaction with the female species…

Commenters have no pity for quitters…

Go away, ugly girl…

Facebook success, in theory…

Prettiness and a sense of entitlement…

Vanilla Ice enjoys Georgetown…

Who is the best Bat Man ever?…

Laughing matters in Clinton campaign…

Why top universities are resembling corporations…

You can’t stop them talking…

How to marry a rich man…

A very valuable Genesis ticket…

Gun Finger…

Friends with benefits…

Why Saudi sex parties can be hazardous to your health…

Companies try to score with athletes who blog…

Apple calls you a liar…

Wikipedia unusual articles…

15 best magazine covers since 1960…

Romeo and Juliet

I was surfing YouTube today checking out music videos when I came across a slew of live performances of Dire Straits. I grew up listening to the band, who really made their mark in the early 80s, and the combination of great lyrics and masterful guitar playing by Mark Knopfler never ceases to amaze me. I discovered that The Killers did a cover of their song “Romeo and Juliet” recently, and was able to pull up a version of this as well. I’m still predisposed to the orginal (the sax part which begins at about the 6:40 mark is great), but I think the sound of The Killers ended up serving them well for this song.

Dire Straits

The Killers

A lovestruck romeo sings a streetsus serenade
Laying everybody low with me a lovesong that he made
Finds a convenient streetlight steps out of the shade
Says something like you and me babe how about it ?

Juliet says hey it’s romeo you nearly gimme a heart attack
He’s underneath the window she’s singing hey la my boyfriend’s back
You shouldn’t come around here singing up at people like that
Anyway what you gonna do about it ?

Juliet the dice were loaded from the start
And I bet and you exploded in my heart
And I forget the movie song
When you wanna realise it was just that the time was wrong juliet ?

Come up on differents streets they both were streets of shame
Both dirty both mean yes and the dream was just the same
And I dreamed your dream for you and your dream is real
How can you look at me as if I was just another one of your deals ?

Where you can fall for chains of silver you can fall for chains of gold
You can fall for pretty strangers and the promises they hold
You promised me everything you promised me think and thin
Now you just says oh romeo yeah you know I used to have a scene with him

Juliet when we made love you used to cry
You said I love you like the stars above I’ll love you till I die
There’s a place for us you know the movie song
When you gonna realise it was just that the time was wrong juliet ?

I can’t do the talk like they talk on tv
And I can’t do a love song like the way it’s meant to be
I can’t do everything but I’d do anything for you
I can’t do anything except be in love with you

And all I do is miss you and the way we used to be
All do is keep the beat and bad company
All I do is kiss you through the bars of a rhyme
Julie I’d do the stars with you any time

Juliet when we made love you used to cry
You said I love you like the stars above I’ll love you till I die
There’s a place for us you know the movie song
When you gonna realise it was just that the time was wrong juliet ?

A lovestruck romeo sings a streetsus serenade
Laying everybody low with me a lovesong that he made
Finds a convenient streetlight steps out of the shade
Says something like you and me babe how about it ?

Here is Mark performing his “Local Hero/Wild Theme”, showing off his unique finger picking style and getting notes out of his guitar most professionals can only dream of…

Tower of Invincibility

Apparently an award-winning commercial development firm in Washington, D.C., will present design plans this week for a grand “Tower of Invincibility”.  The proposal is that it be built in the nation’s capital as a permanent monument celebrating freedom, sovereignty, and peace in America.

Mr. Abramson will hold a news conference to present the plans on Friday, October 5, at 11 a.m. (ET) at the Hay-Adams Hotel, 16th and H streets, NW, in Washington. The event will be webcast live at www.TowerofInvincibilityDC.org.

Mr. Abramson said the people will decide where the Tower of Invincibility will be built. “Everyone is invited to visit the website www.TowerofInvincibilityDC.org. and submit three possible locations in Washington for the Tower of Invincibility in the order of their preference. Invincibility is the domain of every citizen and therefore everyone should have input on where this great testament to national invincibility will be built,” Mr. Abramson said.

Wow, as if we did not already have an uber phallic symbol in our capital, nor a freedom tower in our financial capital designed to be 1776 ft tall.  I almost want to attend the meeting on Friday to see if I can make further suggestions…like making it look like a middle finger to the rest of the world.

Facebook rules

We all know Facebook dominated our college lives (but never work, right?), and then before you could say “news feed” high schoolers were prowling the pages.  And then even our parents.   Facebook then went abroad, becoming the fastest growing network in the UK, with 500,00 users and growing in London alone.

For number nerds, here is what that growth has looked like:

A Selection of Leading Social Networking Sites Ranked by European Unique Visitors*                     Total European, Age 15+ - Home and Work Locations**  Source: comScore
Property	Total Unique Visitors (000)
	Jan 2007	July 2007	% Change
Total European Internet Audience	218,063	224,759	3%
MYSPACE.COM	20,341	25,176	24%
Skyrock Network	11,327	13,785	22%
BEBO.COM	7,461	12,101	62%
FACEBOOK.COM	2,066	10,795	422%
HI5.COM	6,979	9,554	37%
PICZO.COM	7,557	8,035	6%
NETLOG.COM	8,140	7,450	-8%
DADA.NET	4,957	6,689	35%
MSN Groups	6,941	5,528	-20%
BADOO.COM	1,923	5,192	170%

*Based on a selection of comparable sites, does not constitute a direct ranking. ** Excludes traffic from public computers such as Internet cafes or access from mobile phones or PDAs.

The next stop?  A language specific Facebook seems inevitable.  We all know Europeans love to get along (see: WWI, WWII, EU Constitution) so look for Facebook to build its global network.  However, it will have to overcome some obstacles.  Those resolute Germans still swear by piczo.com, and haven’t latched onto the Facebook the way the Brits have.  And sneaky France?  They have created Facebook Paris already, a site hosted through the social network Ning.  My guess is that Zuckerberg forgot to register the domain name, and either a lawsuit or a crapload of money is due for the creators.

Meanwhile, Steve Ballmer claims Facebook is just a fad in today’s Times.

 

Wikieverything

WikiHow to Quit Facebook

Maybe your affinity for Facebook began with a simple desire to keep in touch with your friends, or make new ones online. Or perhaps you were just bored. But now Facebook is the thorn in your side, and possibly a bona fide addiction. If you’re finding it difficult to spend an hour of your waking life without checking or thinking about Facebook, you may be looking for a way out. This is it.

Wikinvest 

Monday also marks the launch of Wikinvest, a web site co-founded by former Amazon.com manager Mike Sha.   Similar to any other wiki site, users can edit articles or contribute new information, and the site is constantly updated with the most recent stock quotes and data.  Companies are listed with company history, stock symbol, current stock outlook, bullish and bearish comments from visitors and members, and stock history graphs. The Concepts section even allows users to list a company or product (for example, the iPhone) that may affect the future of other companies.

This could be a great source for misinformation (just like wikipedia) but also may prove to be just as useful as well.  Those that edit comments can at least be tracked with an IP address, and the Bulls/Bears forum essentially allows any viewpoint to be heard.  Wall Streeters may snub the tool, but Main Street and a Jim Cramer audience may find themselves exploring the simplified format for investment ideas and feedback.

The site is but one day old, so contributions are still in high demand.  But check out Apple or GE for some idea what the site may look like in a long run. 

Revenue will mostly stem from advertising.