I tend to give major league ballplayers benefit of the doubt, even if they're rumored to be jerks, especially if they're surrounded by uncorroborated innuendo... but if the rumors are corroborated, that's another story.
Anyway, Texas Rangers kick Sidney Ponson to the curb.
You may remember the native Aruban from the time he assaulted a judge.
Or this dugout chat.
More importantly, only $3,000 to indirectly kill people?
"poured concrete Vogon love poem"
(Photographic evidence, but I can attest that, as winterspeak notes, "It's much worse in real life."
"Citizens generally have no idea when they have to do what an officer tells them to do, and I would think there is some sort of Due Process requirement of fair notice that the order has to be obeyed before an arrest can be made."
--Orin Kerr, Volokh.com
Wouldn't most people assume by default that they have to do what a police officer tells them to do any time a police officer tells them to do something? I'm not saying that's actually true, nor ought it be, but I think people are far more likely to obey in situations where they didn't realize they had a right to say no than vice versa.
I should emphasize of course that the D.C. checkpoint plan is blatantly unconstitutional, not to mention against everything America stands for ("papers please!").
"In the coming days, as Hillary Clinton moves to the sidelines and Barack Obama takes the stage alone, many people will suggest that America just wasn't ready for a female president."
--The XX Factor (Chad's favorite blog!)
"As devastating as their 29-17 Super Bowl XLI loss to the Colts was for the proud Chicago Bears, it was worse for their coach: Lovie Smith will forever be remembered as the first African-American coach to lose a Super Bowl."
--The Onion
It's not a perfect fit but you see why these two quotes belong together, right?
(We were guaranteed to "learn" at least two of these things from the 2008 Democratic presidential primary: Either America wasn't ready for a black president, it wasn't ready for a female president, or it wasn't ready for a blow-dried pretty-boy North Carolina trial lawyer to be president. At least two!)
The Freakonomics blog recently posted a contest, "asking readers to choose the one question they’d ask if picking a partner to play the Prisoner’s Dilemma."
The five finalists are up (for best question), of which I think #3 is head and shoulders better than the other four. (Distant second is #1. I'm shocked that the people who've seen fit to comment on that post have given so much love to #2 and #4.)
This one's still in progress. Again it's a one move per three days time control (so essentially correspondence chess); this time I'm White.
Despite the content of this and the previous chess post, I don't think it's quite right to assume that chess skill is demonstrated by eviscerating someone in comically few moves. A really bad player will play moves that don't accomplish anything, maybe accidentally give up his horse and so on. You have to be at least a little bit skilled to play moves that actually look solid, that don't immediately give material, and yet lose the game for you in the blink of an eye.
Anyway, I think his taking my pawn on move 8 is fatal:
1. d4 Nf6
2. Nf3 g6
3. Nc3 d5
4. Bf4 Bg7
5. Qd2 O-O
6. Bh6 Nbd7
7. h4 b6
8. h5 Nxh5
9. g4 Nhf6
10. Bxg7 Kxg7
11. Qh6+
(12. Ng5 to follow)
Before today, there were zero ESPN columnists for whom I'd give one iota of care about their issues with golf, father-son relations, and/or alcoholism.
That number still stands at zero, despite the best efforts of ESPN's current front page splash.
It's a sad day for media when the most astute political [meta]commentary comes from a guy better known for covering the Kansas City Royals.
This post accurately points out that McCain and Obama are a huge step up from Bush and Kerry.
Actual interview of Allen Ginsberg, conducted by a religious conservative.
I can't argue with this, despite my visceral dislike for the candidate being touted (not to mention that candidate's spouse).
The big news yesterday was reports of Barack Obama "clinching" the Democratic nomination -- which has symbolic meaning, but which I'll believe if and when he's actually nominated, and no sooner. (This post pretty accurately describes why all the speculation about what Clinton would do was meaningless: She has no incentive to campaign further but also very little incentive literally to concede: Maybe Obama is found with a dead girl or live boy, as the old saying goes.) There's still a tiny hypothetical chance of Clinton getting the nomination -- or the other half of the ticket -- and I'd just as soon wait until that chance hits zero (perhaps waiting in vain).
No matter what happens, apparently all of the major candidates will go out of their way to rig the market and try to keep me from ever owning a home, because they'd rather kowtow to people dumb enough to live beyond their means (and dumber enough to ignore fine print).
Even if I had my own home, in California it wouldn't be safe from somebody deciding they'd rather take it away from me. (Here's more.)
And speaking of being safe in your own home, this story needs no further comment.
So yeah, Obama's nominated, dawn of a new day and all that. Knock yourselves out.
Facebook chess, 3 days per move. I'm Black, my first chess game against anyone other than Julia in over a year.
It's hard to say how much of the other guy's downfall was the premature push to c5, and how much was his failure ever to play Nf3. (In hindsight I should just 4...Nbd7 intending ...e5 against anything other than Nf3.)
1. d4 d5
2. c4 c6
3. e3 Nf6
4. Nc3 e6
5. c5 Nbd7
6. Bd3 e5
7. f3 b6
8. b4 a5
9. Qb3 axb4
10. Qxb4 bxc5
11. dxc5 Bxc5
12. Qh4 Qa5
13. Nge2 d4
14. resigns
(0-1)