Wait a minute... I know this one...

The National Republican Congressional Committee issued a statement saying that "House Democrats have failed to deliver on their campaign promises to change Washington" since taking majority control of Congress in January. The statement accompanied a video highlighting what was supposedly the poor record of Democrats since taking over.

Well, let's see here. The Democrats don't actually have a majority in the Senate - it's 49-49 and there are two independents, who happen to caucus with the Democrats (usually; Lieberman can be up for grabs sometimes). 51-49 is still the slimmest majority you can have, and it isn't enough to override a presidential veto. And guess what Bush likes doing to aggressive Democratic legislation?

The House is 232-201, but since acts of Congress have to pass both houses, it's kind of irrelevant (and 232 out of 435 is only 53% anyway, hardly overwhelming). In either event, Republicans have about as much to do with not getting things passed as Democrats do, if not more.

Here's a logic exercise. Let's say you are someone who wanted the Democrats to gain power and pass the laws they promised to. If those laws don't pass because when the Democrats try to get them through Congress, they're voted down due to Republican opposition, do you think the solution is to elect more Republicans?

In other words, if you agree with the NRCC's video that the Democrats haven't been able to live up to their promises, the choice next election is clear: vote for even more Democrats! (Particularly for president, thus taking that pesky veto out of the equation.)

Alternate headline: "N.Z. couple are total idiots"

The article doesn't mention how old the couple is, but I'm guessing 19.

Pat and Sheena Wheaton said they decided to name their new baby "4real" shortly after having an ultrasound and being struck by the reality of his impending arrival.

When my sister was eight, she got a hamster from the pet store. Because he scratched at the box he was in on the car ride home, she decided to name him "Scratchy." Even my literal-minded eight-year-old sister would have told you "4real" was a stupid name for a baby.

But when the parents filed the name with New Zealand's Registry of Births, Deaths and Marriages, they were told names beginning with a number were against the rules.

Especially names beginning with the combined IQ of the parents, which is considered private information in New Zealand.

"For most of us, when we try to figure out what our names mean, we have to look it up in a babies book and ... there's no direct link between the meaning and the name," Pat Wheaton told TV One on Wednesday. "With this name, everyone knows what it means."

Yeah. For the rest of this kid's life, everyone will know what his name means: that he is, actually, a person! Thank God you came to your senses before naming the kid "Android McFakeBaby."

There's only one thing people are going to know about this kid based on his name: that he had parents who were stupid fuckheads. A good rule of thumb for baby names: if it sounds like something your six-year-old cousin might name his new pet turtle, don't fucking name your kid that. These people have to be 19, because much older and I hope they'd realize that babies eventually turn into adult humans, and once they do, it kind of sucks for them to have a name that looks like it was pulled at random from the text message inbox on their mom's cell phone.

Not the greatest day

Thank God for Alma, because if not for all the time I spent with her, today would have been a pretty bad one. First I went to a mini golf course in Libertyville and it was not fun - you know how most park district courses are either boring or ridiculously difficult for their pars? This was the latter. That stuff will be up later. Stuff that's up now: a recap of the Cubs' awful weekend, and a review of the shockingly bad Fletch. Those two links will pretty much tell you what I had to suffer through today. (Obviously if this is the worst thing that happens to me on most days I don't have anything to complain about, but in my life as it stands, this is what passes for "bad days," certainly on weekends.) But Alma elevates everything.

Pizzeria Zero

On Wednesday night, Alma and I went to this new-ish pizza place on Lincoln, between two of our more standard haunts (Matsu Shita for sushi, Boba Bee for bubble tea). The name of the place was Pizzeria Calzone. It turned out to be possibly the most uncomfortable restaurant experience of my life.

I went in thinking, you know, I might want a calzone tonight. But of all the things on the menu, calzones? Not one of them. That's right: calzone was in the name of the restaurant, yet it was not something you could order there. Maybe this should have been a warning sign, but at the time it was just amusing.

We were the only people in the place, which seems less odd in retrospect. The waitress was a girl who couldn't have been older than about 14 and did the job as if running through a script in her head. Perhaps the regular waitress called in sick and the owners' daughter was pressed into service, I don't know - but if this girl had ever waited a table before in her life, it didn't show. Also, when we asked for water, she brought over two bottles (for which of course we would be charged). That one, I don't know if it was inexperience as much as "thing she had been told to do."

Still, at this point, it was just kind of "eh." And then some guy walked in off the street and started trying to sell the owner some jewelry.

What?

That's right. This guy just walks in and is trying to sell them on this gold something or other. He keeps saying, "It's real gold" and trying to sell it for 50, then 30, then 20 bucks; at some point I heard the owner offer five, at which the guy scoffed. What could possibly be more awkward than listening to some hustler haggle with the owner of the restaurant you're in, not ten feet away?

How about the next part, when I see out of the corner of my eye the waitress nod in our direction and say to the guy, "Ask them?"

Yes, this actually happened. Now you know for a fact that this family had never owned a restaurant in America before. Or at least, if they did, no one like this ever walked into it. Because I can't imagine any restaurant with the reputation of pawning shady jewelry sellers off onto its customers would stay in business any longer than about a week after the first time it happened.

Of course the guy was over shortly thereafter, greeting us with that calling card of guys you don't want to have anything to deal with, "My friends!" Needless to say, we quickly waved him off. But Jesus Christ. The word "unprofessional" seems so imprecise here, since this was clearly a small family business, but how about "completely retarded?" As Alma put it to me a couple minutes later, "We're still in Chicago, right?" (We were.)

I started looking for quick ways out not long after that. The whole place was kind of giving me a weird vibe from minute one, and having to fend off the advances of a total con artist wasn't too appetizing. I ate half the pizza I'd ordered - enough, I figured, where I could then ask for a box and not look like I was trying to flee the premises - and we hit the road.

Ironically, my pizza (fresh from the oven) was actually pretty darn good; I was a particular fan of the crust. Barely seemed worth it, though. I suppose I could order delivery if I ever wanted it again, but then I don't feel compelled to support that kind of operation. Once felt sufficient.

Link updates

A change to the sidebar: the BlogRoll is now divided into two 12-link groups. The first 12 are friends' blogs, sorted top to bottom in order of how much I visit them. (I've tried to avoid sorting them like that in the past, but I mean, is this really going to hurt anyone's feelings? The people who I visit less often either know it or, more likely, don't notice and don't care much either. The people lower on the list tend to update less frequently anyway. I also was forced to drop Nemo and Pearl - I didn't really want to, but I would have had to find two more blogs to balance them out, and they both haven't updated for almost a year. If you guys ever get back online, give me a holler.)

The second 12 are blogs that I either write or read regularly. Try to guess which is which; I think you'll be pleasantly surprised.

As always, if you have a blog that I'm not linking to, let me know - I think I've covered most of this site's regular visitors who actually have blogs, but you never know.

ETA: One other note: while BlogRolling is still useful enough for organizational purposes, it's been terrible about showing updates, which apparently has to do with a lot of ping spam it's been getting. So the links on the side may well be updated and you just won't see the arrow like you used to. I would suggest regularly checking any you might actually want to read.

(As long as I'm here, I got a promotion at work. More money, but also more responsibility. It's going fine so far, and the summer tends to be pretty slow, so things are good at the moment. But ask me in November.)

Truly, it has been a while

I'm still alive, but with not much to say. Things have been fairly busy at work, but not in any kind of interesting way. A couple weeks ago, my parents came out to watch the final performance of the acting class I was in. I actually wrote a whole post on that, and then the computer ate it, and I haven't felt like getting around to writing it again. But perhaps I will post the video at some point, although I doubt many of you feel a need to watch my tiny, blurred, sound-distorted acting attempts, and most of you who would were already there.

I'm also attempting to ramp up the fitness/weight loss plan a bit by using SparkPeople, which helps you track both your eating habits and your exercise. I do want to be careful not to get to the point where I'm obsessively counting and denying myself food even when starving, because that's a bad road to go down, but so far I think I'm doing okay on that front. I think it's just a matter of moderation more than anything else. Also tough: drinking the 8 cups of water a day that the site recommends. I've done it the last two days, but man, that stuff goes through you.

That's pretty much all for now, I think. Sorry my life is so generally uninteresting these days. Hopefully this will improve in the near future.

Turn out the lights

Alma and I traveled to Maryland over the weekend to play with Colby and Tyler in what was, barring something unexpected, our final quiz bowl tournament, 2007 TRASHionals. There have been ten TRASHionals tournament and I've played in seven of them - if that's not reason enough to hang it up, I don't know what is. (Of course, if that required you to retire, there would be a pretty wide open race for the title next year.)

We went out on a pretty high note. For the fourth time in seven years, we reached the top playoff bracket, placing second in our Saturday round-robin group with a 7-2 record. We went 3-3 in the playoff rounds, 3-4 total in the playoff bracket (as our loss in group play to the eventual winners, Craig, Mike, Joe and Anne, carried over), to finish in what was announced as seventh place but I think there's some debate over that, as the team that was announced as sixth evidently had a worse record than we did and we beat them head-to-head. We were initially announced as fifth in 2005 before it was revised up to fourth, so TRASH doesn't exactly have a history of nailing our placement. I'm sticking with sixth unless someone can show me otherwise.

I had one of my better TRASHionals on a personal note as well, so that was a good enough way to end things. I believe I was fourth in scoring, which is a personal best, and I snatched goods off both Craig and Greg in the yankee swap prize ceremony, so that was fun. I was fourth in scoring mostly on the strength of my playoff rounds, which were driven by an 11-tossup round against the Michigan alum B-squad (the Matt-Rob-Geoff-Steve group). My previous TRASHionals high was 8 (accomplished twice, but not since 2002); in this game I had seven in the second half alone. It would have been even cooler if that had been our final game; we had one more, against recurrent foes Tia and the TRASHmen (our first meeting with them was at 2001 Regionals, where we lost twice in the round robin before the miracle 10-30-10-30 finish in the championship match to beat them; including this year we've played them six times since, which is a pretty high amount, and won five of those), which we won handily in a balanced game for the whole team. It wasn't quite Ted Williams hitting a home run, but it was a good finish to my career, and I think Alma would agree.

And with that, the curtain draws closed. As I said to Alma over the weekend, I think we've pretty much hit our ceiling; until teams like the Keenans, O'Reillys, and that ilk break down or retire, we weren't going to go any higher than sneaking into the top five (as teams of mine did in 2003 and 2005), and it hardly seems worth waiting around for when none of the players on those teams shows any inclination to quit. My personal scoring isn't liable to get much better, especially since I refuse to bother with anything as lame as "studying," and anyway fourth place is pretty good. I'm undoubtedly as good as I've ever been, but that will probably be the case for ten or fifteen more years, and how long do I really need to do this?

What it boils down to is that I no longer get much satisfaction from drilling less experienced teams, and aside from doing that over and over I don't see what more there is for me to achieve. Any team I was a part of would probably need to really hit its packet to get past a hump like the Keenans, and while I think that's doable - even if we haven't beaten them since 2001 - we'd need to hit several of our packets in a row to beat several teams of that type in a playoff, and that doesn't seem likely. (Although I wonder now, idly, how my 11-tossup game would have been affected by the Keenans or O'Reillys, not that we weren't playing a pretty good team in that round.)

Even if I did enjoy playing exactly as much as I once did, the value of trips has gone way, way down. For one thing, I have to pay for this stuff out of pocket now, so thank God for small miracles like this year's tournament being in College Park so I could stay with my parents instead of having to pony up 90 bucks a night or whatever to stay in a hotel on top of 200 bucks for an airplane ticket. For another, I love Alma like crazy, but I'd much rather go on a vacation-style trip with her if I'm going to be shelling out, rather than something that feels like nothing so much as work. The only extracurricular thing we had any time to do while not playing TRASH was a trip to the mini golf course in Laurel, and that's only because I insisted on playing it; I'm sure the other three would just as happily have gone without. I think Colby found a little time to sightsee before his flight on Sunday, but Alma and I were so tired by that point that we couldn't have wandered around DC if we'd wanted to. The point is, you're expending an entire weekend on travel and playing TRASH and you really get very little chance to do anything else. Playing TRASH is fun, but it's not so fun for me that this feels justified.

So, like I wrote in my senior quote, every new beginning comes from some other beginning's end. I'll be forever grateful to TRASH, and quiz bowl in general, for helping to introduce me to the love of my life, but it's time for Alma and me to sever that tie. Not completely, of course, because there are people we know through quiz bowl whom we want to continue to know, but I think we're all past the age where quiz bowl has to provide our primary excuse to be social. It's time for me to grow up just that little bit more.

Alma, Tyler, Colby, Charlie and Ryan, all my other teammates from college and high school, everyone from other teams who was ever fun to interact with, and anyone else whose presence mattered - thanks for eleven years, guys, and good night. Be sure to tip your waitress.

Bush urges public not to turn against guns

WASHINGTON (AP) - In the wake of the deadliest act of gun-related violence in American history, President Bush has gone to the airwaves, urging the American people not to let the incident prejudice them against people of the gun-carrying persuasion.

"What happened today at Virginia Tech University was a terrible tragedy," Bush said. "Almost as terrible as if we let it color our feelings towards guns and the people who are, by the Constitution of this great country, legally allowed to own them."

Thirty people, plus the gunman, have been reported killed so far following the shootings in Blacksburg this morning. So far, zero incidents of violence against gun owners have been reported, and no one has come forward with anti-gun messages in response to the massacre. Nonetheless, the president stressed the importance of remaining vigilant.

"It is all too easy to blame this tragedy on guns and people who own guns," Bush said. "But ask yourself: can all gun owners be held responsible for the actions of a few individuals? No, they cannot." Donning a baseball cap with the NRA logo emblazoned on it, Bush continued: "Guns don't kill people, people do."

Asked if it was not in somewhat poor taste to defend the right to gun ownership in his first response to the tragedy, Bush shook his head. "I dearly hope that this incident does not lead to bigotry and hatred, and condemnation of gun owners simply for their superficial resemblance to the perpetrator of this horrible crime. We must not turn against each other in the wake of this tragedy, but we must also not turn against guns. Sweet, sweet guns."

------------------------------------------------------

Lest you think this is merely a parody news item, check out Bush's actual response:

"He was horrified and his immediate reaction was one of deep concern for the families of the victims, the victims themselves, the students, the professors and all the people of Virginia who have dealt with this shocking incident," White House deputy press secretary Dana Perino said. "His thoughts and prayers are with them."

"The president believes that there is a right for people to bear arms, but that all laws must be followed," Perino said, noting that Bush and Education Secretary Margaret Spellings held a conference on school gun violence last October. "Certainly, bringing a gun into a school domitory and shooting … is against the law and something someone should be held accountable for," Perino said.

Even for this administration, this has to be a new low. Can you imagine if, immediately after 9/11, Bush said that it was important to remember how it was the right of every American to own a boxcutter? Because that's about the equivalent message. "Hey, I know this was a terrible tragedy, but let's head off all the potential gun backlash at the pass: owning guns is TOTALLY LEGAL, people, and if bad things happen with them it's not the fault of guns." The only thing missing was Bush actually reciting the NRA's "Guns don't kill people" line (as he does in the fake story), or maybe him saying it while holding a rifle in one hand and Charlton Heston's crank in the other.

To be fair, it's entirely possible that Bush himself never had any such thought and that this was just an administration talking point, but that's not really much better, is it? We all know that most politicians are slaves to special interest groups, especially Republicans, but do they have to make it so damn obvious?

Attack of the 50 Foot Lack of Proportion

Full disclosure: for nearly a decade, between ages 9 and 18, I woke up every morning to WFAN, 660 AM in New York. And on every weekday, what was on WFAN at 7 am was Imus in the Morning. As a pre-teen and teenager, I liked the show, even though in my early days of listening to it some of the language went over my head (once leading to an embarrassing encounter at the dinner table involving my use, despite not knowing what it meant, of the word "boner"). They did parody songs about the OJ trial, Bill Clinton impressions, and so on. By the time I was 14 or so I probably appreciated the humor of Imus' show as much as anyone in the country. But, perhaps tellingly, that's about where it peaked.

Today Imus was fired from CBS Radio, one day after MSNBC pulled the plug on its TV simulcast of his show. I can't say I'm surprised; so many sponsors had pulled out that CBS probably couldn't have afforded to pay Imus even if they'd kept him on the air. I don't know what, if anything, he'll do next - at age 67 he's old enough to retire, and it's hard to imagine anyone being able to put him back on the air for several years anyway.

It would be ludicrous to attempt to defend Imus at this point, and I have no intention of doing so. His comment about the Rutgers team was utterly tasteless, and it certainly wasn't funny; while it's arguable whether or not it was a dismissable offense, the outcry and sponsor pullout made that inevitable. All that said, I find it more than a little strange that this is the straw that broke the camel's back. Imus has a history of saying things on the air that rub people the wrong way; the most widely-reported almost all happened after I ceased to be a regular listener, and I typically only heard a small portion of his show anyway, so I can't speak to what it was like hearing them live. But it seems to me, first of all, that he has said much worse things on the air, as have members of his staff. His sports guy once likened the Williams sisters to wild animals (and not in some sort of "misguided flattery" way), and he himself said of Gwen Ifill that it was nice of the New York Times to "let the cleaning lady cover the White House." Note, however, that while these were widely reported in the wake of his recent comments, I don't have any recollection of hearing them before.

I think two things really doomed Imus here, and neither of those was his history of similar comments:

1. The people Imus attacked were amateur athletes.
There seems to be some sort of perception in the mainstream media that virtually any public figure is fair game for ridicule or disdain because, as people effectively paid to be in the public eye, they are capable of handling it. Heckling athletes is considered an art form in some circles, and many fans boo their own players with relish if said player does not succeed at a particular task, as though they were automatons that were built to work every time. (Remember, even a .400 hitter makes an out six times out of ten.) So when Imus' show attacks Ifill, or William Rhoden, or runs jokes about Chappaquiddick three decades after it happened, that's all well and good. After all, these people are professionals.

But listen to some of the comments by and about the Rutgers women. "A slap in the face?" Really? Again, this isn't to defend what Imus said, but the idea that their whole season was "ruined" by what one guy on the radio said strikes me as over the top. I'm sure none of them listened to, cared about, or probably had even heard of Imus until someone mentioned it to them; the women weren't gathered around the radio for their morning Imus powwow when, to their shock and dismay, he attacked them. However bad it was, the level to which the comment has been skewed seems terribly outlandish. True, I'm neither a woman nor black, and I'm not accusing anyone of falsifying their feelings on the incident. But I am saying that the vehemence with which the nation has turned on Imus would be better directed at real racial issues, not a more or less offhand comment by a shock radio icon who gets paid to be controversial. If not for all the sponsors pulling out, Imus probably could have gotten a raise from CBS, simply for drawing so much attention to himself and the show, more than he's had in his entire career.

The key quote comes from Linzell Vaughn, father of one of the players, as quoted in the CNN piece: "Do not disrespect our children." These women are legally adults, but as college students and amateurs there seems to be this sense of overprotection that Imus unwittingly stumbled up against. His comments were wrong, but the PC coddling of the youth in this country gets worse every year.

2. Imus actually had some credibility.
Far worse comments about a diverse range of people emanate from the mouths of radio and television mainstays like Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, and Sean Hannity on a daily basis. If five comments in ten years seems like a lot, try five comments in ten minutes. The difference? These are all right-wing nutballs who no one takes seriously to begin with. Even when the story occasionally makes it into the mainstream media - like Coulter recently calling John Edwards a "faggot" - there is some quick condemnation and then everyone goes back to their business. Was there any call for Coulter's firing from anything, by, say, Edwards? Of course not. Because (a) Edwards is a public figure who has dealt with attacks before, if not of the same kind and (b) everyone knows Coulter is a space cadet. Firing Ann Coulter for saying something nasty about a Democrat is like firing John Moschitta for talking too fast.

And that was exactly Imus' problem. His show was basically Howard Stern's - except replace Pamela Anderson with Maureen Dowd. Amidst all the relatively low humor (albeit certainly not as low as Stern's), Imus ran charity telethons, discussed politics seriously, interviewed authors - it was like NPR with dick jokes. The problem is, when you do that, people tend not to focus on the dick jokes - until you go too far. And that's exactly what happened. Imus was hoist by his own petard, the petard being his credibility. Put Imus' words in Rush Limbaugh's mouth and he's on the radio right now.

So maybe that's the biggest problem I have with this whole thing. Why should the standard be so much different, just because Imus does some serious interviews? If it's national news and a firing when one person says it, it should be national news and a firing no matter who said it. But I can guarantee you it wouldn't be. The story is being reported as "Imus fired for his comments," but that's bullshit. CBS and MSNBC fired Imus because of money and because of their images, not because they were so bent out of shape over what he said. That doesn't mean it's okay to say, but of all the incidents that have ever gotten radio or TV personalities fired, this has to be among the tamest.

Finally, I liked Jason Whitlock's take on the issue (that's the first time you've ever seen those words in a row), and he's exactly right (and comes at it from a better perspective than I do). Imus' words were distasteful, but were they really that virulent? Were they really so harmful to the black community? It's hard to believe, and I wonder when I think these things if I just don't have the perspective to appreciate them, but Whitlock confirms that at least some members of the black community feel the same way. Imus' remarks should have been frowned upon, and he should have been suspended (as he was prior to being fired), but the end of his career, as this very likely will be, seems a steep price to pay for an insensitive remark that became the cause celebre of a slow news week.

East Coast bias

Growing up I always felt I had a pull to Chicago, even though I didn't get to spend much time out here. Now that I do live out here, though, I find that in many ways I'm really an East Coast kid at heart. Case in point: the little internal spasms of joy I get listening to all the little references slipped into songs by Fountains of Wayne, the power-pop quartet behind "Stacy's Mom." Anyone who grew up in the New York area in the late 80s/early 90s needs to listen to "Traffic and Weather," the fourth track on FOW's new album of the same name, for a reference to the NBC-4 newscasters that had me cracking up.

Traffic and Weather may not have the hit that Welcome Interstate Managers had in "Stacy's Mom," but it is almost unquestionably a tighter, more consistent album. Where Managers lags for much of its second half, Weather never falters, even if its highest notes aren't quite as high as its predecessor's.

The album opens with what is probably its best overall song, the first single "Someone to Love," which features Adam Schlesinger and Chris Collingwood's typical detailed verses with a rollicking chorus. Like the songs for which they're best known, it's a great slice of power pop, but then so is most of the album - although Schlesinger and Collingwood also love playing with a number of different genres. "Fire in the Canyon" is a better country song than what most country artists are putting out today, for example.

Also on display is the FOW sense of humor - without being as overtly comedic as, say, Weird Al Yankovic, FOW have managed to put together a number of jokes, both straight and wry. For example, "Someone to Love" unfolds by describing the loveless lives of a male and female, and then puts them in the same place for the third verse - but in Beatles-like fashion (think "Drive My Car"), the song twists at the end. "'92 Subaru" and "Strapped for Cash" are both great style parodies - "Subaru," an ode to pointlessly souping up a boring car, sounds like the Doobie Brothers, while "Cash" sounds like a Steely Dan song not told in metaphors. Add in the amusing story of hitting on the woman at the DMV ("Yolanda Hayes") and you've got a pretty funny album.

But as usual, this isn't the whole story. Schlesinger and Collingwood craft pop songs without holes; the words flow all over but they always seem to run together perfectly - consider the line "They tell each other jokes that they both know that they both know" in "New Routine." How many bands could get away with that one? The lyrical craftmanship is on display everywhere from rhyme to meter to wordplay in titles ("Revolving Dora"). The voices change from song to song - a bored business traveler, a jealous boyfriend, a compulsive gambler, various omniscient narrators - but the quality remains pretty constant. There are a couple of lesser songs - "Planet of Weed" is fairly disposable, in particular - but overall the quality is high throughout.

Basically it's another fun album from a band that makes little but. If you liked "Stacy's Mom," there's no reason not to be all over this one.