skip to main |
skip to sidebar
What's really going to happen when gas is priced out of the consumer market? The Omnibus!With gas prices revving up to ride off in to the sunset of consumer intangibility, automotive engineers have unfortunately proven that economic forces are insufficient to produce the necessary product change on time. Despite the existence of hybrid and natural gas cars, as well as a handful of other alt-fuel models, and despite mileage-hoarding "hypermiler" techniques, we have failed to plan in time for this to affect us before we (or, those of us who haven't already) cross the threshold of "I can't buy gas anymore". City bus systems even in moderate-sized cities (I'm extrapolating this from my experience with (sub)urban Utah's UTA system) have been steadily growing.
You know where I'm going now, and I bet you're all so excited. We all get to ride the bus! Bus tickets will go up in price, sure, but I bet that after a short period of time, most major cities will privatize their fleets, creating competition, and bringing our little part of North America more in line with our Southern neighbors. This exciting transitional phase in American economic history will doubtless bring hearty tales of the everyman to otherwise calloused and naive suburbians, like the one I heard the other day: "All I do all day is smoke pot and watch TV with my dog." It'll be awesome.
Also, there are still bicycles.
I'm going to contribute to those alt-fuel groups, if I have anything left over after gas station tomorrow.
Further proof that John McCain is the second coming of George W. Bush.
Criticism of John McCain has been varied, to say the least. Ultraconservative talk show hosts like Rush Limbaugh have publicly announced that McCain is not conservative enough, stating that they would even vote for Hillary Clinton over him. Critics from the left - especially his likely November opponent, Barack Obama - have denounced him for being too conservative, saying that a McCain presidency only amounts to a third Bush term. Both sides have a legitimate beef, but accusations of McCain as Bush, Jr. are starting to look more accurate. Even more than his policy, McCain's speech is starting to sound downright Bushian of late.
Consider this. McCain, whose major strength is his understanding of the military, said the following at a press conference: "[I]t's common knowledge and has been reported in the media that Al Qaeda is going back into Iran and is receiving training and are coming back into Iraq from Iran." Senator Joe Lieberman, who was standing at his side, quickly whispered into his ear, after which McCain said that he misspoke, and that Iran was not training al-Qaeda in Iraq forces. A simple mistake, right? Perhaps, except that he made the same misspeech a day earlier. The error is a small one - Iranians are 
training Iraqi extremists, not al-Qaeda forces - but one that hearkens back to the road to war in 2002. Bush was adamant that there were connections between Iraq and al-Qaeda, which ultimately proved to be false. It's far from clear that McCain is as gung-ho about war as Bush has been, but this sort of mistake from a professed military expert does raise some eyebrows.
Couple that with another recent statement, and things seem even more sketchy. When asked about the situation in Iraq now that the death toll for U.S. soldiers had risen above 4,000, McCain answered, "We're succeeding. I don't care what anybody says. I've seen the facts on the ground." That's a statement that sounds eerily like Bush. The war in Iraq, along with many other hallmarks of the Bush administration, were perpetuated due to the government's insistence on ignoring reality. That has been the most glaring criticism of George W. Bush. It's unnerving to think that the likely Republican nominee could already have the same thing going against him.
Parsing the Jeremiah Wright sermons.
I know I went on record a few weeks ago as saying that nothing between March 4 and April 22 would matter in the primary season, but since the craziness about Rev. Jeremiah Wright refuses to go away, I'll weigh in on the matter. I stand by my opinion that it doesn't matter in the slightest. More than anything else, I'm irritated by how distorted and skewed these sermons have become by major news outlets in an attempt not to discredit and smear Barack Obama, but to simply sell a story.
The phrase "God damn America" is ubiquitous now. A simple Google search on the phrase yields over a million hits. Pretty impressive stuff for a sermon delivered over five years ago on the south side of Chicago. Yet if you ask nearly any American what the speech was about, I doubt very much that any of them could tell you anything beyond "he hates America." That's troubling to me. My frustrations about the us versus them mentality of post-9/11 patriotism aside, I want to point out that Rev. Wright is not attacking America here. He's mourning. You can see that in the text of the speech. Amazingly, considering all of the YouTube videos in circulation containing sound clips from the speech, I wasn't able to find a complete text of the sermon. (If you can, mention it in a comment and I'll get it posted up here.) The title of the sermon is "Confusing God and Government." He spends his 40 minutes arguing that citizens look to their government for the things that only God can provide. 
Specifically, he makes the distinction between an good, benevolent, and merciful God and a petty, human, and flawed government. The comparison should surprise no one. No government, nor any other man-made institution, can claim to be perfect. He made several references to the American government, especially the war in Iraq, but didn't limit himself, also referencing the Egyptian, British, German, Russian, and Japanese governments.
The sound bite about America was what drew the most attention, though. Yet listen to the quote - the whole quote - and tell me if this is a sentiment you really disagree with:
"When it came to putting the citizens of African descent fairly, America failed. She put them in chains. The government put them on slave quarters. Put them on auction blocks. Put them in cotton fields. Put them in inferior schools. Put them in substandard housing. Put them in scientific experiments. Put them in the lower paying jobs. Put them outside the equal protection of the law. Kept them out of their racist bastions of higher education, and locked them into positions of hopelessness and helplessness.
"The government gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three strike law and then wants us to sing God Bless America. Naw, naw, naw. Not God Bless America. God Damn America! That's in the Bible. For killing innocent people. God Damn America for treating us citizens as less than human. God Damn America as long as she tries to act like she is God and she is supreme."
Admittedly, the quote has an air of conspiracy theory to it. But if you think of the government as the common man, then there's little disputing what he says. Blacks have been repressed for years. There's still a very real element of racism in America today. That's undeniable. Wright is denouncing the sin of pride in America for her sense of superiority, and that's something that's hard to argue with.
The other thing causing all of this flap is his argument that America is reaping the rewards of imperialism abroad with terrorism at home. Here's an excerpt from that speech, delivered days after the September 11 attacks:
"We took this country, by terror, away from the Sioux, the Apache, the Arawak, the Comanche, the Arapaho, the Navajo. Terrorism. We took Africans from their country to build our way ease and kept them enslaved and living in fear. Terrorism. We bombed Grenada and killed innocent civilians - babies, nonmilitary personnel. We bombed the black community of Panama with stealth bombers and killed unarmed teenagers, and toddlers, pregnant mothers and hardworking fathers. We bombed Khadafi, his home and killed his child. Blessed be they who bash your children's heads against the rocks.
"We bombed Iraq, we killed unarmed civilians trying to make a living. We bombed the plant in Sudan to pay back for the attack on our embassy - killed hundreds of hardworking people - mothers and fathers, who left home to go that day, not knowing they'd never get back home. We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon and we never batted an eye. Kids playing in the playground, mothers picking up children after school - civilians, not soldiers. People just trying to make it day by day. We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and South Africa and now we are indignant? Because the stuff we have done overseas is brought back into our own front yard.
"America's chickens are coming home, to roost. Violence begets violence. Hatred begets hatred, and terrorism begets terrorism."
Again, you can disagree with the idea that the American government has a secret agenda to systematically remove undesirables from within its borders or overseas. But there's little disputing America's foreign policy has created a powerfully anti-American feeling abroad. And it's in that sense that Rev. Wright said "God damn America." He's not angry. He's mournful, wishing that history could have led us to a different place. He's preaching accountability for transgression, saying that we need to be responsible for our actions and take our lumps. Above all, he's preaching repentance, coming back to the suffering of Jesus Christ as a way to redemption at the end of both of these sermons.
You can disagree with his choice of examples for his sermons. I don't think that politics has a place in religion. They'd do well to stay apart. But his points are completely valid, I think. They just need to be read in context. They also need to be read in a state of mind free of hyperpatriotism, remembering that America isn't the center of the world and that criticizing the government and the country isn't the grievous sin it's made out to be.
An exciting weekend, but not for this writer.
Weekends like this one are exciting to watch. Underdogs come up with big upsets, powerhouses are shocked, and endless buzz is created. It's a lot of fun. It's a little less fun, however, when you've trumpeted up your foolproof prediction method and get to watch it all fall to pieces. Let's review:
West Virginia 73, Duke 67. Duke was rated a full two and a half points higher in the SPI - high enough to earn them a spot in the finals in my bracket. West Virginia ruined my life again this year, knocking Duke out in the second round. They knocked off UConn a few years back in the second round as a 7 seed. I'm not too keen on those Mountaineers.
Stanford 82, Marquette 81. One point the other way and we aren't having this discussion. I went out of my way to talk about how overrated Stanford is and how underrated Marquette is. So much for that.
Realistically, those are the only two big upsets I had. I have 12 of the 16 remaining teams correct so far (only wrong on Washington State, Villanova, Stanford, and West Virginia), but the teams that I lost had a big impact. It's rough. It just goes to show you that there isn't a foolproof way to predict something as inherently chaotic as the NCAA basketball tournament. I'm still doing better than the wife (35-13 to her 33-15), but I'd be surprised if she doesn't end up outperforming me. Next year, when you see my article come up about my failsafe predictions for March Madness, cut straight to the chase and ask who my wife has winning it all. (She picked Tennessee, incidentally.)
AP Photo - Chuck Burton
Lots of upsets, and big ones, too.
This is the downside of going public with a bracket you think is really good - when it takes a nose dive, everyone finds out. There were four big upsets today, and my metric only got two of them right. And even that's debatable. Let's look at the numbers.
Western Kentucky 101, Drake 99. The SPI had #14 Western Kentucky (112.4489) narrowly beating #16 Drake (112.0300). It wasn't an easy choice. Still, it's hard to argue with a scoring differential of 14.8 over your last ten games, even if they come against Sun Belt competition. I had complete faith in the SPI for this one. (That means I spent the entire overtime glued to my computer, watching the score update every few seconds and screaming when Drake pulled ahead with seconds to play.)
San Diego 70, Connecticut 69. This one floored me. San Diego is one of the worst teams to make the field (104.4046, #59 SPI) and UConn is, while not top-tier, pretty solid (110.1566, #24 SPI). I thought this one was a no-brainer. And somehow, San Diego kept it close the whole time and pulled out a squeaker in overtime. Just goes to show you that no statistics-driven metric is perfect.
Siena 83, Vanderbilt 62. I liked Siena in this matchup and was so confident I didn't expect anything other than a Siena blowout. I got it, but a quick look at the SPI chart surprised me. Vanderbilt was ranked considerably higher than Siena in pretty much every category. Look at the numbers:
SPI Vanderbilt 108.0898 Siena 106.6667
SOS Vanderbilt .5644 Siena .5143
Scoring differential Vanderbilt 7.2 Siena 5.9
Not really sure why I was so confident there, but I picked the upset and got it. Weird.
Villanova 75, Clemson 69. Here's one where I was just dead wrong. Seriously. How could I have seen #25 Clemson (109.8635) losing to #58 Villanova (104.6078)? The mind boggles. I just don't get this one.
Overall, the SPI performed significantly worse today, only going 9-7 for a total of 24-8. Not a good day. For comparison, my wife's bracket is 25-9. Also, she wishes to inform the loyal readers of the Worb that her bracket was not solely determined by name recognition, but by an elaborate process consisting of looking at both the team's seed and their win-loss record. I thought you should know out of duty to accuracy (which means I had to tell you on penalty of no sex until I'm 75).
Only one significant upset on the first day of the tournament.
There were some nail-biters, but my bracket is nearly perfect after day one of play. Here's a rundown of the three misfires I had:
UNLV 71, Kent State 58. The SPI had this one right, actually. #41 UNLV rates 107.2224 compared to #43 Kent State's 106.7044. When the scores are that close, though, I look to the last ten games, and Kent State had a much higher scoring differential. I yielded, and I picked the upset. I paid for it, too.
Pittsburgh 82, Oral Roberts 63. Same problem here. #37 Pittsburgh rates 107.7219 to #39 Oral Roberts' 107.3852. That's even closer than the first matchup. Oral Roberts had nearly eight points higher in the scoring differential category, though, so I went with the big upset. Now I just have to hope Pitt doesn't go on a huge run. They shouldn't, though, since Michigan State (their next opponent) has an SPI of over 109.
Texas A&M 67, BYU 62. Anyone watching this game knows that it was close. #17 BYU had a much better SPI (111.7292 compared to 109.0498), but I forgot to apply the smell test here. BYU plays in the Mountain West Conference. Their biggest win was over Louisville, yes, but it was a team riddled with injuries. I should have known better. It's just hard to pick against your alma mater.
So through the first day, the SPI is 15-1. My bracket is 13-3, but that's just because I'm an idiot and ignored my own system. For the record, my wife, who more of less filled out her bracket on name recognition (I love you, honey), is standing at 14-2, only missing BYU-Texas A&M and USC-Kansas State. That's a little humbling.
Mount St. Mary's 69, Coppin State 60.
I promised regular updates, and I'm here to provide the first. The play-in game was tonight, and on Monday I said that I expected Mount St. Mary's to win over Coppin State. The score is in, and the Mountaineers won by nine points. It was pretty close for most of the contest, but Mount St. Mary's pulled away in the clutch. Aficionados of the SPI will remember that the Mountaineers have a significantly higher rating than the Eagles. Mount St. Mary's boasts an SPI rating of 103.8015 compared to Coppin State's 97.3570. A difference of six and a half points is not to be ignored. Thus far, things are looking good.
For the record, Mount St. Mary's next opponent, North Carolina, has an SPI rating of 117.2178. If a six and a half point difference is huge, then a thirteen and a half point difference is even more so. Stay tuned.
