SEX MULLET

Happy New Year...but not for THE Ohio State University...

Number of consecutive BCS bowls Ohio State has either gotten embarrassed in or, well, embarrassed in the last seconds of a game: Three.

Texas won the Tortilla Chip Bowl minutes ago, and all Michigan fans smiled, because we know it means one thing: the Big (11) Ten is officially in the crapper, poised for an epic Michigan return to stomp on the Big 12 and Pac-10.

As the VPs and Marketing people of the faceless sponsoring corporations presented trophies to Texas, I recall how I read a damning article on how much of a sham the college bowls have become (the seemingly incorruptable Rose Bowl included). Yahoo News has the article, and it's very insightful into what our beloved sport is becoming: centered around money, perks, and elimination of the presence of the NCAA altogether (note that the NCAA has nothing to do with the national championship anymore...it's basically a fledgling organization that receives money from big sponsors to have big-time schools compete for a lot of money, and is awarded a completely arbitrary championship that more times than not has been open for debate). We all praise Michigan for not caving to corporate sponsors for Michigan stadium -- the tradeoff was forcing Bill Martin to build the damn skyboxes to get athletic department revenue instead of having a few signs on the scoreboard -- but the parts of college football that we want to see fixed go unchecked in the name of dollar signs.  FOX has the BCS until 2010, then ESPN takes over, and even then, they have structured their contract so that a playoff system cannot be instituted. It has to take the mutual might of the universities, the NCAA, and even Barack Obama, to cleanse the best darn sport in the land !

Yahoo News Column.

P.S.  Does anyone know what the hell 'G' is ???

P.P.S. Stephen Ross is buying the Miami Dolphins. Amazing!

P.P.P.S. There was an epic mullet spotted on the Texas sidelines. Picture coming.

Fact vs. Artistic License: An All-too Frequent Problem

This is more a reason for me to gush about how ultimate Wired Magazine is, but I began to think more deeply about what I read in a column in the December issue. Scott Brown, the author, writes about the more-frequent appearances of "Eco-Disaster" films at movie theaters the last few years. Specifically, he cites the newest, The Day the Earth Stood Still, as one of the most glaringly preachy.  Keanu Reeves is an angry alien determined to punish the human race for raping the Earth and exhausting its natural resources.  Totally plausible, right?  It's only natural for Hollywood to latch onto certain issues of our time. Before Eco-disasters it was terrorism (and still is in some ways), before that it was governmental issues, like drug control and oil politics, and before that it was...well, I don't remember. Maybe end-of-the-world scenarios like Armageddon or Deep Impact. 

Hollywood likes to be trendy, and obviously global warming is the issue of choice for a lot of actors, producers and directors, but is the point to offer a message or just entertain the droves of movie-goers looking for an often-politically-incorrect story to make them not have to think for two hours?

The real issue here is something that I as a holder of a history degree have a problem with: artistic license to original source material. When filmmakers deliberately change source material so that it's updated or correlates more to something that's current. Case-in-point: Casino Royale is not about stopping a terrorist financier; Actual story: Bond must face Le Chiffre in a game of Baccharat (the game he plays in Goldeneye) to get the secret Soviet Agency SMERSH to take out Le Chiffre for blowing money they entrusted to him on investments in brothels in France, not Montenegro. The producers completely raped the original storyline that connects perfectly to the James Bond we see in Dr. No, in the interest of making a film about terrorism. Terrorism + James Bond = $$$ for Columbia Tristar. When Syriana was made, Stephen Gagan took the basic premise of Robert Baer's superb book See No Evil about the terrible abuses of power by the NSA and CIA in the Middle East in the 1970s and 1980s, and turned it into a film about the government's ties to MidEast oil conglomerates that led to the assasination of a Saudi Prince to push a pro-American brother of his into the throne of his ill father. Quantum of Solace was morphed into a slight commentary on the state of the world's water supply, but an emotion-driven story that doesn't even feature James Bond as the central character. The governor of the Bahamas tells him a story of his revenge on his unfaithful wife and how it left him with little to hold onto in terms of emotional baggage and his ability to put his sorrow behind him. 

With The Day the Earth Stood Still, the source material and title refers to what the world would look like had a nuclear war taken place, leaving the planet devoid of life. Keanu Reeve's character is meant to be the one that warns the world's leaders of the dangers of nuclear war. Not disregard for the environment. 

I have hope for two important films that open on Christmas Day, though. Ron Howard has already publicly said that Frost/Nixon uses every line of actual dialogue found in the transcripts to the Frost interview of President Nixon. For Valkyrie, there is a lot of material to pull from, as there is a book written by Hans Bernd Gisevious, and some mystery as to which of the German officers in Wermacht Heer was the point man for the operation. Tom Cruise plays Claus von Stauffenburg, but some maintain that General Friedrich Fromm was the only man who could have carried out the final attempt on Hitler's life on 20 July 1944 that would have allowed the German officers to arrest the SS and seize power from Hitler. It will be interesting to see which angle this movie takes, and if it's as accurate as it needs to be.

Why filmmakers feel the need to alter source material that provides all the details to an event is beyond me, but it sure is annoying when they alter something that is recorded fact in the interest of selling a few more tickets. I will be thoroughly ashamed if Valkyrie just places von Stauffenburg at the center of the film and ignores the intricacies of the plan that they had to achieve in order to make their move on Hitler. American filmmakers have already screwed up enough of our own historical events (Pearl Harbor *SIGH*, U-571, the list goes on and on), so I suppose it's time to start screwing up other nations' history.

The Winner Is...

Was there ever any doubt ?

Runners-Up included: Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, French Prime Minister Nikolas Sarkozy, Governor Sarah Palin, and Zhang Yimou (who is he you ask? he's the man that designed all those amazing productions seen at the opening ceremonies of the Beijing Olympics).

I think it was a given that President-Elect Obama would be the person of the year here in America, but...the world? I think Mr. Zhang would have been an interesting choice, given the times we live in (internationally, that is) -- coincidentally, I finished Thomas Friedman's latest book, and he devotes an entire section of the book to China, and it just seems like China is the most up-and-coming place on the globe right now -- why not pick a man that was tasked with presenting "the good side of China" to the world?

Lots of person of the year-related content up on Time.com now so hop over there to check it out...can't exactly argue with slapping Obama on the cover of a magazine for the 32485437078623th time, but that's why I like that they put that excellent illustration on it instead...he's a symbol of the greener pastures that lie in waiting for us Americans. When Franklin Roosevelt accpeted the Democratic nomination in 1932, he said, 

"Throughout the nation men and women, forgotten in the political philosophy of the Government, look to us here for guidance and for more equitable opportunity to share in the distribution of national wealth... I pledge you, I pledge myself to a new deal for the American people... This is more than a political campaign. It is a call to arms."

Obama's the guy to call us to arms...roll up his sleeves and take it in the gut for a year or maybe two of his term as President, and I'm guessing that's why he is TIME's Person of the Year.

Job's Done. The Bitch is Dead.

I'm tremendously proud of our Senate here as the clock strikes 11:30 pm on Thursday December 12th, 2008. It is on this day that the immient implosion of the U.S. automobile industry may become a reality. I truly hope this is the last time I ever have to write about this crap, other than when it's reported that Detroit has been sold to Canada or something.

Approximately thirty minutes ago, I was flipping channels waiting for Jon Stewart to come on, and all the cable news channels were at commercial breaks. Until I flipped across Fox News, and noticed the text on the screen had nothing to do with the rerun of Bill O'Reilly's show that was on. It said:

"Alert; Auto Bailout Loan Dies in Senate, 57-32"

After I was done giggling, imagining the three auto CEO's being awoken in their beds by a phone call from some assistant, saying that this happened, I thought, "Wow, this government actually allowed this thing to fail." And then I thought about Speaker Pelosi fainting in her living room. And then I envisioned President-Elect Obama spouting profanities. Haha

By the way, notice that the vote does not total 100 members? Who were the eleven senators that didn't even vote I wonder??

It appears the big issue that caused such a lopsided vote, was the UAW. The NY Times explains:

The automakers would also have been required to cut wages and benefits to match the average hourly wage and benefits of Nissan, Toyota and Honda employees in the United States.

It was over this proposal that the talks ultimately deadlocked with Republicans demanding that the automakers meet that goal by a certain date in 2009 and Democrats and the union urging a deadline in 2011 when the U.A.W. contract expires.

I didn't even know that the U.S. automakers paid more than the two big Japanese companies. How could they afford to do that if they were on the edge of bankruptcy? And why would the damn union come out and say "Yea, you know how we were willing to do anything to save these jobs? Well, we'll do anything but that." It just breeds a climate of distrust, and there already was quite a bit of distrust leading up to the vote on this bill...and now the average American can look at UAW Chief Ron Gettlefinger, and lump him in the same breath as Wagoner, Mullaley, and Nardelli.

Thomas Friedman once again rails against the bailout in his Wednesday column

Here's what each company submitted as their reformed plans for the second testifying session:

General Motors:  Request $18 in loans, reduce its $60 billion debt by half, explore selling Saab, Ponitac, and Saturn, break even in 2012

Ford: $9 billion in reserve loans, launch hybrid and electric cars in 2010, convert truck plants to small car ones, become profitable in 2011

Chrysler: $7 billion in loans at low interest (just to make it through 2009), cut work force and health care benefits, CEO Nardelli will take a salary of $1 (Ha !)

This has turned (wrongly) turned into a political battle, with people in Detroit trying to point fingers at the GOP for killing the industry -- just because Mitt Romney writes a blunt editorial a month ago -- and the fact that no one in Detroit batted an eye when the White House decided to pull the proposed funds from legislation marked for making more fuel efficient technology! And watching Gettlefinger this morning, he is dodging the question coming from a smart reporter. The reporter is repeatedly asking him, "So, are wage cuts an option?" and Gettelfinger just spouts off something about how they're working hard and they love their country.

If the only casualty in this mess is that the UAW is dissolved (fat chance) I would dance in the street. But don't worry, the all-powerful Henry Paulson will step in and just hand these guys a check because Bush told him to.

What Universe am I In?!?!?

Raise your hand if you thought by mid-December Michigan basketball would have beaten two top-five schools and likely be playing better basketball than Michigan State right now???

Yeaaa, didn't think so.

I felt enormously left out that I hadn't found a ticket to the Duke game, but as amazing as seeing that flood of maize rush the field - er - floor (have to remember this is M Basketball), I enjoyed watching it on national television almost as much...the last few times Michigan was on ESPN nationwide, Dickie V was in the house and they blew chances to win. But it was more satisfying knowing Bilas was sitting there with his shoe in his mouth. 

Michigan also has an ace-in-the-hole come Christmas time...a gift from Santy Claus really:

Laval Lucas-Perry will be eligible to play on December 20^th

Lucas-Perry is this guy. He left AZ when Lute Olsen bailed, and Beilen raves about his shooting skills. Only a three star recruit, but look what Beilein is doing with his current guys! Zack Novak, the kid who nailed all those clutch three-pointers is only a three-star guy, and a Scouts, Inc. ranking of 40. Huh!? Kid looked like freakin' White Glen Rice or something! Deshawn Sims, on the other hand, is a beast, and it only made me opine for Ekpe Udoh even more, because this team would be unstoppable with him in the paint and Sims nailing jump shots and backdoors. 

And Kelvin Grady learned how to pass! OMG! 

And looky what I found:

Men's Basketball - Michigan Wolverines (2008-2009)

RPI Rank: 11    SOS Rank: 5     Record: 6-2 (0-0)

Anyone who thought Michigan was going to have to wait until 2010 to break the NCAA Tourney streak, me included, has obviously underestimated how good a coach Beilein is. So long, NIT !

Random sidenote: Brandon Graham was on the floor with everyone jumping up and down. Haha

!#&%$#@!^$#%@#$!

For the past 48 hours, I have been having the most ridiculous problems trying to play that game up there ^^^, Crysis. I happened to be in Gamestop asking if they were hiring, and they had a big sale going on, and Crysis was sitting there with a big, red "Save $30" sticker on it, so I couldn't resist, and I figured since I have a pretty powerful computer finally, I'd be able to run it pretty well. My Vista machine contains the following:

AMD Athlon 64 3500+  2.2 GHz

2 GB OCZ Dual Channel RAM

Nvidia 8600 GTS 256MB

Sound Blaster Audigy 2 Value card (finally got it to get along with Vista)

Shockingly, the framerate is pretty good, but there's a different issue with this one: The SOUND!!! Oh my lord it sounds terrible. This is similar to what I experience on my system, and during the entire time I play, not just in spots:

Horrible, god-awful to listen to right? Yea, and guess what? There's no way to fix it!

I have scoured the internet for solutions to this for people that are having this same problem, and there is nothing from Crytek, nothing from Microsoft, and nothing from EA.

The inCrysis Forum has a 19-page discussion that has been open for over a year, with people coming up with all kinds of solutions, the most viable being (1) changing the paging file of the RAM, (2) checking driver versions, etc., and other things. Also, another forum called nVnews has a clue in a discussion that says basically:

Microsoft didn't implement hardware use with DirectX10, so it instead uses software and can't process as much.

Normally, this would be fixed in some sort of patch or hotfix, but Crytek no longer makes patches for Crysis because an expansion has been released since the most recent patch. Great.

The last clue is the particular sound hardware that Crytek used for Crysis, called FMOD. It's extremely advanced and uses a TON of channels, but, in their forums, the version of the software that Crysis uses is specifically mentioned as being HORRIBLY out of date (version 4.07.23)! And in order to upgrade the software within Crysis, there needs to be a patch!

I went directly to fmod.org, and downloaded a new version of the software, and it installed, then I ran Crysis again, and opened the console, and saw that the FMOD version had not changed...

Basically this amounts to (1) Microsoft not having the proper compatibility for advanced sound hardware and allowing different options for output, and (2) Crytek being too lazy to see that there's an issue with their game and not upgrading a simple piece of software to improve performance on the types of machines that most of their customers have (i.e. yours truly).

Game Developer 101, folks: FIX YOUR G#&DAMN SOFTWARE when thousands of people say on the internet, "Help, we need a fix for this so we can play your flippin' game!"

Will the national champion please stand up ??

I for one welcome our new BCS computer overlords !

First, let me wish all fellow sports fans a Happy Jimmy V Week!  Always some great college basketball to be had during this week, especially the Big Ten-ACC Challenge. Michigan gets Maryland tonight and the Dukies on Saturday. Go Blue!

Did you hear it on Sunday evening, echoing across the country? Ranging from the sun-soaked hills of L.A. to the plains of Texas to the beaches of Florida? A loud, booming cry for something that...well, makes sense?

That booming echo was: P-L-A-Y-O-F-F- P-L-E-A-S-E !!!!!!!!

The current Bowl Championship Standings are as follows:

1. Alabama (0.9713 avg.)

2. Oklahoma (0.9351 avg.)

3. Texas (0.9223 avg.)

4. Florida (0.8851 avg.)

5. USC (.08076 avg.)

*per USA Today

...and so on.  These are the only numbers that really matter so late into the season, as the other BCS bowls are a pretty clear picture (Penn State to the Rose, Cincinatti to the Fiesta, Utah to the Fiesta or Orange, Boston College/Va. Tech to the Orange, Boise State to the Fiesta, Ohio State (dammit) to the Fiesta, and Oregon State/USC to the Rose).

Last week, OU and Texas were swapped. Then OU ran up the score on Oklahoma State late in the 4th quarter by way of some silly OSU mistakes to get some style points, and Texas was sitting there, idle, collectively groaning and watching their Big 12 title hopes go down the drain. But fear not, Longhorns! You are not to blame, and you still have hope!  The Big 12 is absolutely stupid for agreeing to let the higher BCS ranked team be their representatives for their conference championship. That shows a complete lack of loyalty to your own conference, and a selfish thirst for the bigger financial draw (Oklahoma likely carries more "weight" than Texas in a bowl setting, despite being humiliated two years ago and getting destroyed last year by Rich Rodriguez's players)

So the scenario is thus: On Saturday, Alabama and Florida will play for one of the BCS spots, and Oklahoma and Missouri will play for Oklahoma's ticket. What happens if Missouri wins?  A ClusterF*#k.

The BCS people might as well just throw those five teams in a hat and decide that way, because that's basically what this amounts to, is who gets lucky at the end of the year to fall into the title game.

The SOS (Strength of Schedule) rankings are as follows, with the toughest-ranked schedule being #1, and so on, but listed in the order of the current BCS standings:

79. Alabama

1. Oklahoma

4. Texas

11. Florida

54. USC

The computer rankings vary (I watched a very fascinating and alarming expose of the six guys who do the computer rankings, and I felt afraid.) but as far as I can deduce, they are as follows, based on the above SoS rankings and quality wins and other factors:

1. Oklahoma

2. Texas

3. Alabama

4. Texas Tech

5. Utah

6. Florida

7. USC

8. Penn Shhhhtate

So the computers believe that Oklahoma losing to Texas still warrants them a higher ranking, and an undefeated SEC team is ranked third.

This directly clashes with the two top 25 polls, the USA Today and AP polls. Get this: 

Coach's Poll: Alabama (58 first place votes), Oklahoma (2 first place votes) and Florida (1 first place vote).  Mack Brown didn't even vote for his own freakin' team!

AP Poll: Alabama (62 first place votes) Florida (3 first place votes), Texas (o votes)

Thus, the computers have affected Florida's chances for a title shot, the SoS rankings have screwed USC, and the two Top 25 polls have screwed Texas! All of these teams are playing extremely well right now, and who wouldn't love to see Alabama battle Texas, Oklahoma battle Florida, and USC battle Utah or Penn State in a small playoff system that gets rid of the arbitrary rankings that have way too much variability and human stupidity involved?

Lastly, here's how crazy the scenario can get after this coming Saturday's games:

-Florida beats Alabama, giving them a lock on the #2 BCS ranking

-Missouri beats Oklahoma, giving a mad scramble for #1 amongst Texas, Florida, and Alabama

-USC beats UCLA by a wide margin, yet is given a spot in the Rose Bowl over Oregon State, a team they lost to and Penn State destroyed.

If any combination of these things happen, then: Florida will be in the national title game with a team that is likely Oklahoma or USC, Oregon State will get barred from a Rose Bowl birth that they essentially earned, and Texas will be passed over by any one of these teams due to their lower BCS average, including a team they beat by ten points.

Can anyone explain to me just who in the hell is #1 and #2????

Isn't it scary that this:                                                

and this:

became this:

AAAAH IT'S HIDEOUS! LOOK AWAAAAAY!

And on a sidenote: those who hate Notre Dame got their wish as Charlie Cheesecake was allowed to stay on as head coach for at least another season!

The True Mad Men

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

General Motors' entire marketing team should be shot. Right after Rick Wagoner is executed by firing squad comprised of all the workers he has laid off due to GM running out of money.

Yesterday the company announced that their endorsement contract with Tiger Woods would end a year early so that GM can cut advertising costs while the company avoids bankruptcy. General Motors' advertising expenses are insane. They spend $240 million on sponsoring golf tournaments and other sporting events (over $20 million on golf alone). And Woods's contract entitled him to free use of Buick automobiles for any tournament, but GM will not disclose the annual payout Woods gets from GM. I once read a book about Tiger Woods's endorsement deals back in 1997, and at the time, for example, American Express would pay him $30 million over three or five years. This year Nike signed him to $100 million over 5 years...so GM surely pays him at least $5 million a year to drive around in a car brand that doesn't even sell 200,000 units annually, and the median driving age is 68.

Meanwhile, the company is making cuts across the board of business expenses. The most sensible one being the decision not to power the 562 clocks in their offices because it's too expensive to replace batteries or change them on daylight savings...

- General Motors' current advertising budget is $3 billion.

- Rick Wagoner makes $2.2 million per year...after raising his salary back to full compensation this year (had been making $1.5 million after a 50 percent cut).

- General Motors spent $1 billion to develop the Chevrolet Volt, but guess what ? They have no cash to bring it to market by the 2010 target.

And, Oh, look here!  GM has also decided to cut TWO corporate jets from their fleet. A GM spokesguy says:

"It is response to budget cutbacks in general due to the sales slump and credit crisis," Wilkinson said, adding that two other planes were cut in September.

This coming after the hypocrisy of those three auto CEOs flying to Washington at a cost of $20,000 per round trip per man.. My favorite "them being at a loss for words" moment was when a Congressman from New York told them, "There is a delicious irony in seeing the three of you come off a private jet with tin cups in your hand." The most interesting case is Mr. Wagoner, who has publicly said that GM is cutting costs of executives who travel around the country, but his own costs will not be reduced, so he can keep his private jet. However, when the three executives return to D.C. after the Thanksgiving holiday because Speaker Pelosi gave them a complete mulligan, they may take carpools.

A 21st Century Michigan Football Manifesto

Isn't it remarkable that for the first time in most of our lifetimes, we all witnessed quite possibly the worst season of Michigan football in 129 years? Think about that: this is the first time in FORTY years that the win-loss record has been below .500.  I saw a thing where Michigan State had 2 consecutive winning seasons for the first time in almost that long.  All Michigan does is win football games!  It's only natural then, that a ton of the old-fashioned types or the panicky types fear for the future of Big Blue. It is to those folks and any others who are waning in their faith for the Yellow and Blue that I offer my manifesto.

Things change, but the tradition of Michigan does not. I don't have to sit here on a soap box and go over all that's been said about why Rodriguez was or was not the perfect hire for Michigan. I personally believe that in 2 seasons Michigan will be in Pasedena. People like Jim Carty say Rodriguez eroded the family values put in place by his predecessors. Maybe, but only to replace them with new ones. Rodriguez personally met with each player when he got to Ann Arbor, and on Senior Day accompanied Brandon Harrison on the field because his parents were late getting to the Big House. I have a different view: Rich Rodriguez was caught off guard by the aura of Michigan. Can anyone besides Bo, Carr, Moeller and now Rodriguez truly explain what it's like to step into the head job at the most legendary program in college football? No. Rodriguez just simply could not have been prepared for what to expect. No one jumped on him at West Virginia because he told some critical fans to get a life...because he was their guy, he was from within. If Lloyd Carr had said something like that we all would have laughed and said, "That's 'ol Lloyd, sticking up for his program." Why is it any different when a guy from outside the program does it?

Michigan's bowl game streak may be over, something many thought would never happen (Ha!), but if that's the casualty for putting something in place that will enable the program to win for years to come, then fine.

There's one redeeming aspect in all of this:  At least we aren't Notre Dame 

Number of players that left when Bo was hired: 65

Number of players to leave so far in the Rodriguez era: 7, may be 8 if McGuffie bails

- Rich Rodriguez Contract: 6 years, $2.5 million/year

- Cost to the University if he were fired after year one:  $4 million dollars plus $300,000 base salary plus $1.65 million for one year of compsenation = $5.95 million

- Charlie Weis contract: 10 years, $4 million/year

- Cost to University of Notre Dame if Weis is fired in year four, after a 6-6 season: $20 million

And so, my fellow Maize and Blue brethren, it is thus said:

Rich Rodriguez is not Lloyd Carr. In fact, just about the furthest thing from Lloyd Carr. That's a good thing.  Isn't it weird that the media could actually access the Michigan football coach? This falls into my point about how RR was so underprepared to deal with the baggage that comes with being the head football coach at Michigan: at times you could see frustration in his mannerisms, he snapped at reporters, but in the good like "why did you ask that" way, and was a little too off the cuff, but in a way it's good because RR has a PERSONALITY. Now, that's nothing against Carr, especially since I have personally met the man. I have never been in awe of anyone more than Lloyd Carr.

We can finally stop having to say Michigan wastes its talent by going 8-4 every season. Because after 3-9, how can it get any worse?? Do you think Rodriguez will allow any recruit to come in from this point on with the same phone-it-in attitude that a lot of Carr's guys had (see: Morgan Trent)? No. Anyone that doesn't buy into his system and what is expected of them as players will be stripped of their starting job or will leave the program in a pissy fit of anger (see: Justin Boren -- seriously, the guy left because Rodriguez cursed at him too much and Barwis made him feel fat.)  Tate Forcier is coming here on January 2nd and is already pumped to take away Threet's job.

We have witnessed the one and only season in the history of Michigan football in which a walk-on quarterback was asked to lead a horrendous team and thus cause him to be even stinkier. I have never seen a quarterback as bad as Nick Sheridan, and it just shows how Lloyd Carr completely forgot to recruit other quarterbacks to fill in for Ryan Mallet, his assumed starter. What in the world would we have done if Steven Threet had not transferred last year?

Badges of Fandom were earned this past season and helped to attrition the less-than Michigan faithful. Those of us who stood in utter shock as Toledo charged onto our field, victorious, or those who held onto hope at halftime of the Wisconsin game and stayed put as thousands of others filed for the exits. Or those who stood in the combination rain and snow storm, shivering, ever-hopeful that Nick Sheridan would complete one damn pass to put Northwestern to bed. WE are true Michigan fans. I'll remember all these games this year almost more than any others in the 17 years I have been sitting in that stadium watching champions being born. It tested our will as Michigan Men, but we still came to the stadium every Saturday because we know what is at the end of the tunnel.

Never again will we endure a season with losses to ND/OSU/MSU in the same season. Rodriguez will never forget Weis attempting to throw a 60 yard bomb with a 3 score lead, or that dick Dantonio saying that only if his team had a 3-9 record would they have been embarrassed losing to Penn State, or Tressel putting his benched senior quarterback in a game he had no danger of losing control of to pile on two more TD's, with Woody Hayes's famed 50 point beatdown in 1967 lurking in the back of his brain (anyone who says that wasn't what he was trying to do is fooling themselves).

Just keep this vision in your head: Rich Rodriguez, standing on a platform, hoisting a crystal football, marking the awakening of the Sleeping Giant of college football. Desmond Howard said during Ohio State week that he believes. We all should, too.

We. Will. Be. A. Fucking. Machine.

An Unprofessional Review of "Fable II"

Peter Molyneaux may concede that "Fable II" is not the 100 percent perfect masterpiece he had hoped Lionhead Studios had churned out this time around, but who's criticizing? Okay, the game is 99 percent a masterpiece, and one percent crazy glitches and a few design choices. But luckily for Molyneaux, there's a one percent margin of error in my mind.

Hundreds of years after the events of the first Fable, in which a slightly homosexual sorceror recruits an orphaned boy to come to a place with other annoying people including a stupid douchebag Guild Master who annoys the hero all the time, we re-enter the lands of Albion to play as a character vaguely connected to that ancestral line of heroes experienced in the first game. "Hero X" experiences great tragedy and is again rescued by a mysterious magical hero who talks to him through a dog, and must exact revenge upon the villain, Lord Lucien (who looks eerily like Andrew Jackson -- symbolism???) in a rousing good show of an adventure that is the best RPG since Morrowind.

The mark of a great game is when the designers put something that hasn't been done before into their work. Enter Molyneaux's crowning achievement of Fable II, the loveable dog. The whole point of the game is that the player feels connections to both his character and others in the world. To see virtual beings interact just like real people is amazing, and you know it's for real when you witness the change in expression on the dog's face when the character has been away from him for long periods of time. Molyneaux wants us to feel compassion or hatred for things in his world, and it's remarkable. The amount of freedom to create a unique character is something I hope is copied and tweaked many times over, because it's highly enjoyable.

The world feels so much different than other RPGs, too. The towns are old, the terrain unaltered. Molyneaux has admitted that they deliberately gave it a European feel, and it shows. The countryside reminds me of Lord of the Rings just a little, and unlike most RPGs where walking everywhere feels laborsome, I actually enjoy wandering around, and that's because of the dog:  Molyneaux programmed him to be completely aware of everything around him, and he finds any and all treasures hidden from view. Fable II isn't necessarily a complex story or complex in its philosophy, it's just complex in what you can do in the world, and that's something not seen before.  I'm OK with the fact that there wasn't some shocking plot twist or a truly epic plot, because it's different!

Credit Molyneaux for admitting that Fable II has some bugs and things, but geez are there some pretty silly glitches. At one point, my character's son was frozen in place for days, so I couldn't interact with him or get him to follow me, so I had to wait until it fixed itself somehow. At times the dog gets stuck on objects and just walks back and forth in place, and if he happens to be pointing out dig spots or treasure, you cant get him to show you where it is unless you walk way behind him to get him unstuck and then carefully tiptoe towards where you had been walking. Also sometimes in combat enemies get stuck on the ground or the character himself gets stuck, and has bitten me in the rear a few times. The Xbox at times struggles to load everything off the disc quickly, so characters will start talking but nothing is coming out of their mouth, or the dog will be just a shadow on the ground following you around. Most are just funny more than irritating.

The genius of Fable II is that it takes the core formula of the first game, expands it, improves it, and makes it a whole heckuva lot more fun, and that's all anyone could have hoped for. It's extremely polished, addictive as hell, and I'm glad it's here. Molyneaux can only craft his true masterpiece from here on out, because he's got the template for a terrific game right in his lap.

It Exists !!!

RollingStone just reported that Axl Rose has posted the ENTIRE Chinese Democracy album up on MySpace to stream over the internet. Wow !

After an initial listen, it really does sound like a reincarnation of the old GNR that became legendary on Appetite. It's bizarre though to listen knowing that Axl is the only original member on this record. The poor guy made all his other former bandmates so angry that none of them wanted to work on the album with him ! Give him credit though for *finally* getting this thing pressed onto disc. It's remarkable.
We've heard glimpses of what a new GNR would sound like, when the band Velvet Revolver showed up a few years ago with those other GNR members (Slash included) in tow, and they made a killer first album, the second not quite as good, but it still made us wonder, "if only Axl was here." Now Axl has emerged out of the darkness with his iconic voice in front of him, and he sounds damn good.

If there was ever a time to appreciate what GNR gave us twenty years ago, it's now. Imagine if the band had not disintegrated and Axl's ego had not kept an album like this from being out in the open for 13 years. GNR would not be the legendary rock band that made their first album one of the best ever made, but something more: ever-lasting. And that's what Axl has done with this album. Made the GNR name stand for something once more.

RollingStone gives Democracy four stars out of five in a great review, and it's well deserved: GNR is one of my favorite "lore bands," because to me, they were the pioneers of modern rock and roll...they know their roots and there's no band that is more quintisentially L.A. than GNR. Axl waited 13 years to make this record, and GNR has one of the more fascinating backgrounds of any rock group. The fact that Appetite for Destruction was even made is an achievement in itself, and has a pretty fascinating story (in this RollingStone cover story) Forget Metallica, forget Motley Crue, forget everyone else, Guns n' Roses are the patron saints of rock and roll, and I can't wait to hold their completed opus in my hands on Sunday.

Guns n' Roses last public appearance in 2002. I remember jumping up and down when they came onstage because I had never ever seen them perform live.

a TARP to cover the shame that is Detroit

Democrats are proposing tacking on another financial bailout, in the form of $50 billion in loans for the Detroit automakers. Well, $25 billion now and another $25 billion after the new year.

Jenny Granholm and Carl Levin are the main proponents of the legislation, but of course Speaker Pelosi and the Auto companies themselves are also pressing for the cash. I found this internal GM email that illustrates just how desperate they are. More importantly, a few notable journalists have written some pretty pointed arguments against this idea, and I am in accordance:

Thomas Friedman wrote a brilliant column berating the bailout plan. His hatred for General Motors is so biting that it's funny. However, it was preceded by the excellent Paul Ingrassia in the Wall Street Journal. And Charles Krauthammer brings up the union argument.

Friedman was all over the place this week, appearing on the Daily Show, and then on CNBC this morning (Part 1 & Part 2)

And finally, the clearest signal to me that General Motors deserves to die, are the private comments of Vice President Bob Lutz at a private dinner in January:

"–Hybrid cars like those made by Toyota “make no economic sense,” because their price will never come down, and diesel autos like those touted by Chrysler are also uneconomic. The only place in Europe that diesel-driven cars are big, he said, is where diesel fuel is half the cost of regular gasoline; in most places there, the costs are comparable and diesel has little market penetration.

– Global warming is a total crock of shit. I’m a skeptic, not a denier. Having said that, my opinion doesn’t matter." (With the battery-driven Volt), “I’m motivated more by the desire to replace imported oil than by the CO2 (argument).”

– With more and more good-quality cars on the market these days, “you’ve got to look at the business artistically, too. Part of our business is creating blockbusters–just like the movie business–yet we never think of ourselves that way. A car is an exciting mobile sculpture that you want to own, drive and be seen in. That’s why (auto-industry) comeback stories are always design-driven.” One GM car that fills that bill, he said, is Cadillac’s CTS."

*Source

I find it shameful that the Democrats want to spend taxpayer money on rewarding incompetence in an industry that America should have no excuse being the laughing stock of the world in. How much longer can General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler survive on a dead business model? The answer: as long as they keep getting handouts from the government to make bad products.

*My* Obama Cabinet 2008

I truly believe President-elect Obama has a unique opportunity to assemble one of the most unique cabinets ever assembled by a new president. It's at least refreshing to not have a President who appoints men who worked under his father's administration (listening, George?), but I would be a bit worried if Obama continued to install Clinton administration veterans (If they are truly qualified, then fine).

So we know that Rahm Emanuel of Illinois will be the Chief of Staff, and I agree with the choice. It would have been dumb not to pick someone with whom Obama had a prior relationship. Though Rush Limbaugh called Emanuel a "Chicago thug" on his radio show the next day. Shouldn't the White House Chief of Staff be somewhat aggressive? It seems like a job that requires a little bending of elbows and standing up to people. I have to believe that Obama is not going to do everything Speaker Pelosi and Senator Reid say...it's amusing that the Democrats think they have carte blanche with a legislative agenda -- two things may prevent that, (a) Obama just ignores them and (b) If the Republicans hold onto the Alaskan Senate seat of Ted Stevens and Al Franken loses in Minnesota, it isn't a clear-cut majority in terms of voting. And by the way, what in the hell is with their treatment of Senator Joe Lieberman ? Senator Reid publicly said this in regard to Lieberman's support of John McCain:

“It was wrong, and it was improper. If we weren’t on television, I’d use a stronger word of describing what he did ... Joe Lieberman is not some right-wing nutcase, Joe Lieberman is one of the most progressive people ever to come from the state of Connecticut."

Hello, my name is Harry Reid, I admire Joe Lieberman, and want to take away his chairmanship of the Homeland Security Committee and demote him to a lower chair on the Veteran's Committee. Real nice. I'm glad the Congressional Democrats favor bipartisanship...

Anywho, back to Barack. Of course all of the news channels speculate as to who will be offered what post, but right before Election Day Politico took some better guesses. But I think Obama can do better for some of the positions. The New York Times is also closely following the potential new team, as well as Huffington Post. It was pretty impressive watching Obama give that press conference last week with that team of ultimateness behind him (save Jenny Granholm). If he can show that kind of thoroughness in his consideration for the rest of his advisers, it certainly looks infinitley better in comparison to the Bush team.

I'm no expert of course, but it's almost like common sense combined with watching too much "The West Wing" to be able to conjecture a Presidential cabinet (Politico guess goes italics):

**Oh, and check out this nifty NYT tool to guess the Cabinet ! Also American University's neat transition study, and CQPolitics' tool.

1. Secy. of State: John Kerry / Kerry *seems* like a good pick, but I would get so very tired of hearing him talk....what about Senator Richard Lugar of Indiana, he's been on a lot of those Iraq trips and is pretty pragmatic.
2. Attorneys General: Janet Napolitano / This woman is from Arizona so she is likely pretty centrist...at this point anyone is better than Gonzales.
3. Treasury Secy.: Tim Geithner / That guy used to run the NY Fed, but I would advocate for Paulson staying on, I think he's done well with the financial crisis, not rushing things
4. Secy. of Defense: Robert Gates / Another person I'd like to see stay on, because it seems like he knows what he's doing...but what about Chuck Hagel, the one Republican opposed to the war?
5. Secy. of Agriculture: Tom Vilsack, some guy from Iowa / whatever, he's a farmer, let him have it; Or else there's some guy from the Farmer's Union to pick.
6. Secy. of Energy: Schwarzzenegger!?!? / That would be cool, but what about Al Gore !!!
7. Secy. of Education: some guy named Joel Klien from N.Y. / how bout U of M's own Maris Visnovskis ! :-D
8. White House Council: I vote for Bradford Berenson, a former White House Council, he's a genius.
9. EPA Chief: some dude named Robert Sussman. / someone else smart, I hear James Woolsey has some kind of environmental expertise.
10. Secy of Veteran's Affairs: Max Cleland ? / John McCain !!
11. Homeland Security: anyone not named Chertoff / What about Joe Lieberman !
12. Secy. of the Interior: Bill Richardson maybe ? Or John McCain !
13. Commerce Secy.: I list this because the Commerce Secretary is enormously important to internet regulations, and will have to fight Joe Biden on net neutrality, so Obama will have to pick someone like Ted Steve....er....Maria Cantwell of Washington or former Virginia Senator George Allen.
14. Secy. of Health and Human Services: Howard Dean of course...how convenient that he's no longer DNC Chair

Random Posts:
Chief Economic Adviser: Paul Krugman !!
Special Assistant to the President: Ron Podesta (Lobbyist Hater)
Climate Czar: None better than Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. This man is truly passionate about the environment, and explains global warming better than Al Gore does.
Rumored "Auto Czar": David Bonior, former MI Congressman, and NOT Jenny G
Ambassador to the United Nations: Colin Powell !!
National Security Adviser: this is a tough one...because the current one, Steven Hadley, is a fool: Bob Woodward rails against him in his latest book; BUT, Richard Clarke needs this post.

President-Elect Obama can certainly do whatever the heck he wants, but it's critical that he recognizes the immense opportunity to put his first stamp on Washington. If it's all Democrats, fine. The difference is if they are all qualified or not, and most of the people he's considering are qualified. He's already made the right decision to take it slow, but I'm reminded that when Bill Clinton took office, he waited until the very last minute, but that's why Obama has this amazing transition team working day and night to ensure that he gets the best people around him before January 20th so that they can start doing America's work and not the Democrats' work. The country can't afford anything less.

Morning in America...

Anyone not moved to tears at some point last night, is not an American. I can't offer much insight, but I know that never in my young life have I felt like an American more than I did at 11pm last night.






The entire world is in awe of us as a nation, and it gives me goosebumps to look at headlines from around the world:

Brazil, Quebec, Colombia, Prague, Ecuador, Paris, Berlin, Athens, Reykjavik, Dublin, Torino, Jamaica, Amsterdam, Lisbon, Johannesburg, Barcelona, Stockholm, Damascus, Istanbul, Brussels, Bulgaria, Rome, Krakow, Romania, Madrid, Beijing, Tehran, Jerusalem, London. And Nambia.

The world is a big place, and there's one word that does not require translation on any of these pages: Obama.






In retrospect, RollingStone magazine led the charge for this man, endorsing him last March. They know progressive politics better than anyone, and relish this moment: Obama is McGovern, McCarthy, and Carter for them, and we are all in for a remarkable journey.

Obama's speech here. And McCain's here. I felt so humbled by McCain, too. These two gave us an election for the ages, and it's just as much a victory for McCain as it is for Obama.
Tom Friedman's Tuesday night column.

Way to go, America.



*Photos from the Chicago Tribune

This is the End. Bea-utiful Friend, the End....

Nearly two years of crap come to and end tomorrow starting at 7 AM EDT, and I am enormously excited for what we as Americans will witness tomorrow. I'm spending all day today reading as much content as I can to make me better informed about these two Senators of utmost character, so that I can proudly cast my second-ever presidential vote for one of these men tomorrow morning.

Before offering some of my personal feelings about tomorrow, I want to post some of the really well-written newspaper endorsements that I have come across in the last few hours. *Note: The Obama endorsements that I have posted are coming from newspapers that endorsed George Bush in 2004, and the McCain ones are coming from newspapers who endorsed John Kerry, just so I can avoid appearing biased in my selections.

**Though I MUST post this endorsement from The Economist, the British economics/current affairs magazine. It obviously can't carry too much weight since they are not involved in our political process, but I am taken aback by how noble it is. It carries a lot of weight for me, because I think it's important for Americans to remember that this election has globe-spanning following. The entire world is going to be watching OUR news channels tomorrow, because they have been just as captivated by the election as we have, and they recognize that when a new American President is chosen, that man becomes the de facto leader of the free world, and so they have every right to want to express how they see our election, and frankly, The Economist is about as big as it gets in international news, aside from say the BBC. If I happen to come across opinions from other parts of the world, I will certainly put them on here, but until then, read this now.

The Denver Post says Obama is "better equipped to lead America into a more prosperous future" ... Kind of an odd editorial, but Colorado is an important electoral state

The Chicago Tribune says Obama would be more of a centered pragmatist than people think, and govern aptly.

The Houston Chronicle says Obama appears to posses the tools to confront our myriad and daunting problems.

-------------
McCain Endorsements

The Virginia Daily Press says Obama's hopeful message of change, when subjected to the glare of factual light, pales in comparison to Senator McCain's experience message.

The Detroit News (I didn't remember that they *didn't* endorse anyone in '04, but apparently that's the case) says "McCain can lead in uncertain times" ... I guess I posted this since I'm surprised ANY Michigan papers endorsed McCain after he gave up on all of us

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

Those are all the non-Bush papers I could find. It's appropriate though, because Obama's endorsement tally is about double McCain's (273-142 as of today).


I'll make this short. I have every confidence in the world that Obama will be a great president. McCain will make a great president,too Why couldn't they have been on the same ticket?
This election has been about ideas and about the men. Not the political parties or who has the most skeletons in their closet. Both Obama and McCain have character marks against them, but they are both good men. For much of the election, McCain was the better man, and Obama was the better politician, but they've swapped roles for the final stretch: McCain tried the very smear politics that killed his 2000 bid, and Obama coolly deflected McCain's rantings. Watching any McCain rally in the last few months, has been agony for those who admired McCain's original appeal. He came off as a bad comedian or MC checking to see if his mic was on cause noone got his joke. Except in McCain's world now, his supporters cheer patriotism and boo the very utterance of Senator Obama's name. When that crazy old lady looked McCain in the eye and said, "Obama is an Arab," McCain let his old self come out, and came to the defense of his rival, amid jeers from his own crowd. I looked at his mannerisms, and saw a worn-out, honest politician who is frantically trying to bail out of a sinking ship, and he has done admirably in unshackling himself from a lot of that waterweight. McCain most certainly has welcome new ideas for an old and tired Washington circle, but he has so much political baggage with him, it is a difficult choice.
Senator McCain's ideas are far different than George W. Bush's, and, were he to have just campaigned on those instead of resorting to the campaign tactics of his former rival, he would still be the better man. Senator McCain has some of the most progressive ideas on energy I have ever seen out of a Republican, but they have nearly vanished in the presence of his biggest political baggage: Governor Palin. McCain has ideas for investing in every avenue of green technology, and pressing automobile companies to develop a fuel cell automobile, and replacing transportation fuel sources, as well as converting the U.S. power grid to a carbon-neutral power grid with nuclear power. Obama has failed to elaborate on any of his energy ideas, and Senator Biden knows nothing about creating jobs, only how to take them away by befriending banks and lawyers who lobby him on his chair in the Senate Finance Committee.
I'm convinced Governor Palin is not a maverick or even a politician...she was McCain's cop-out to the Republican base and his ace-in-the-hole against a Democratic candidate who had driven away the women's vote. When he looks reporters in the eye and says she is qualified to be Vice President of these United States, I see a closet admission that he screwed up. Were there anyone, anyone at all besides Sarah Palin not named Rudy Giuliani at his side, McCain would be ahead in the polls going into tomorrow. Obama was smart enough to recognize that voters would believe him more with Senator Biden at his side, and plucked one of my favorite Democrats out of the Senate to help him lead this country. That is not a glaring endorsement of Senator Biden's character, however, as Biden has been just as bad a political liability to Obama's campaign as Palin has to McCain's bid. Biden's done fewer interviews, given fewer straight answers, and thrown more mud than Palin has, and that's a reflection upon Obama's lack of control over his campaign. But Obama picked the man who would help him win, not embarrass him. BUT, this is about the top of the ticket, not the bottom. If both Obama and McCain do their job, we won't hear a peep out of either Vice President.
Obama has the ability to lead, even I can recognize that. His ideas are pragmatic, versed, and even progressive. I would have no qualms about voting for him if it weren't for his staunch favoring of a gigantic federal government with no ceiling on spending. Sure, he'll cut your taxes, but in the interest of propping up the middle class, not growth. He is not a friend to the globalization system I study so frequently, and will have to learn that the hard way when 5 million jobs are not created during his first year. He is, however, a smart guy. I'm much more confident in his ability to think logically about a solution than is McCain, even though Senator McCain's foreign policy views, for example, are far more centrist than Bush.

No matter who wins, he's gonna have to strap this country on their back and march us into a better time to be an American. In 1932 Franklin Roosevelt came to the White House on a wave of enthusiasm. He didn't have many clear ideas on what he was going to do for the country, he just knew that he had to try his best to fix it. Not until his second term did he campaign on the New Deal to reinvent an America who's beacon had faded so violently from that city on a hill; the world scoffed at the idea of America as a global leader, with its financial system in ruins and no infrastructure to carry it out of the Industrial Revolution. I'm voting for who I think can offer a 21st Century New Deal, or, Green Deal as it's been called at times, because America isn't in good world standing right now. I recognize, too, that ideological superiority is cyclical, and if the Conservative America begun 40 years ago by Richard Nixon dies an overdue death by the hand of Obama and Biden here in 2008, then I'll stand up and salute them. I can't ignore the historical significance of what is probably going to happen tomorrow, and I confess I want to be a part of it. Voting for McCain is the honorable thing to do, but voting for Obama is the *right* thing to do. Only twice in our history has one party held what's called a "Super Majority" in Washington, and I recognize that Liberalism's time is now, because nothing out of George Bush's America has worked. I want a divided government, but I can't for the life of me pass up the opportunity to help start something exciting. I don't truly believe that Barack Obama will bow to every whim of his fellow Democrats, because that's not fair to what he has preached. He's too smart a guy not to realize that if he is handed our nation's highest office, he's gonna have to work with everyone. I *want* this man to show us what he can do, because if he made it this far, he's done something right. I want this man to have a shot to make America better. There's a reason Joe Biden was picked to help him...Biden has the chance to become possibly the most legendary vice president we've ever seen, because he will have helped an African American President do what 43 white men could not: take America to that next step in our evolution as a country for all the world to admire and take after. McCain is somewhat equipped to do the same, and there's still a chance I may vote for him, but there's a difference between fighting for your country and fighting to make your country better: McCain's Navy life has only made him know how to do the first of those items and a little bit of the latter. He hasn't quite taken that final step to realize there's more at stake here than the fear of higher taxes or the fear of possibly just picking up and leaving a failed nation-building workshop in Baghdad. If I'm gonna vote for Obama, I do it with the belief that he's still the better man, and right now he is. That, and, what the hell, vote for the smart guy with the funny ears :). The Presidency is built on the ability of good and decent men to triumph over evil, and right now that's Barack Obama. He's better equipped to make the American image one for the world to emulate. It's that simple.
Or will I decide the Conservative America lives on, and vote for McCain?
That decision I'm just not ready to make. Dennis Miller of all people said something on "The Tonight Show" recently. He said that no matter which guy wins, he's gonna get behind him and say, "Let's Go." As soon as the election is over, I'm gonna get behind whoever wins, and support them.
President Kennedy's Special Adviser, Ken O'Donnel, once said during the Cuban Misslie Crisis: "If the sun comes up tomorrow, it is only because of men of good will. That is all there is between us and the devil."

If the sun comes up Wednesday morning and Barack Obama is our President, then I made the right choice...

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

Now, I ask everyone out there to do what I'm gonna do: Turn off the news channels, get away from the internet news sites, for 24 hours. Make up your own damn mind, don't let anyone tell you who to vote for, just make an informed decision. Wait until 7pm tomorrow to sit back and watch an exciting election night. Don't watch the channel you normally watch, either, watch a new source, and admire that the people on that screen are trying to report on something extraordinary. Me? I'll be lounged on the couch eating pizza, with ABC News on, and occasionally will flip to get a laugh from Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann on MSNBC. Then at 10pm, flip over to Comedy Central to watch Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert live, to laugh about everything we've just witnessed (I swear a commercial earlier said 11 but it is definitely 10).

Prediction: Much too hard to say, but I think it's Obama, but by much closer than a lot of people think. And if McCain wins? Well, then that's a bit of history in itself.

McCain Problems Compounded

Do I really need to point out McCain's big flaw? Just to be safe, I will.

I'm gonna feel a little bit like the Daily Show here, but all this stuff really is true.

John McCain had the best line of the campaign when during the third debate, he looked Senator Obama right in the eye and said, "I am not President Bush, and if you wanted to run against him you should have run four years ago." McCain has so consistently abandoned everything that made him such a wonderful candidate in 2000, in order to have a fighting chance with the armada of foolish conservative voters that are more Pro-Bush than McCain will ever be (90% voting be damned).

"Incensed, McCain ran ads accusing Bush of lying and comparing the governor to Bill Clinton, which Bush said was "about as low a blow as you can give in a Republican primary". An anonymous smear campaign began against McCain, delivered by push polls, faxes, e-mails, flyers, and audience plants. The smears claimed that McCain had fathered a black child out of wedlock (the McCains' dark-skinned daughter was adopted from Bangladesh), that his wife Cindy was a drug addict, that he was a homosexual, and that he was a "Manchurian Candidate" who was either a traitor or mentally unstable from his North Vietnam POW days. The Bush campaign strongly denied any involvement with the attacks"


After it was clear McCain was the GOP nominee, he said this to Chris Matthews:


So I guess that's why McCain repeatedly let the RNC run ads saying Obama was either (a) anti-American (b) cavorted with domestic terrorists (c) a godless Christian or (d) corrupt, with corrupt friends, and used those corrupt friends to register voters (see: ACORN)

Secondly, I want to throw up when McCain gets sucked into the conservative clamoring to shout "Drill Baby Drill" at any event McCain has. He is in such a tough spot, to keep Bush's people happy, that he and Sarah Palin both say the following any time they are in a red state:

John McCain Will Put America On The Path To Eliminate the Strategic Threat From Oil:

To Mitigate The Threats Posed By Our Dependence On Foreign Oil, We Must Increase Oil Production Here At Home. We have proven oil reserves of at least 21 billion barrels in the United States. But a broad federal moratorium stands in the way of energy exploration and production of another 18 billion barrels of oil. It is time for the federal government to lift these restrictions and to put our own reserves to use.

I don't think McCain ever wanted to do this, but once he picked Sarah Palin, he realized the stupid conservatives listen to Palin, so adopted her views on drilling for oil...giving Obama the opportunity to push the "McCain is in the pocket of Big Oil" line. Even T. Boone Pickens said that drilling here in America is one of the stupidest things we could possibly do right now. I really hope if McCain is the president, that the Democratic Congress will fight him on this and knock some sense into him, cause that's their job. McCain so frequently abandoned his own principles, that each time he did it he pushed more voters away than he reeled in, and that's why he's losing right now. The Economist thinks he can win, but he has a lot to do before tomorrow.

On the other hand, McCain has a totally fantastic energy proposal that I wasn't even aware of. If he had spoke of this more in public I think people would have listened.

Now, one of McCain's wash issues is the Iraq War. It helps him when people ponder what Obama would do about the situation, and it hurts him when people look at it and say, "Oh, crap. We're still there." McCain is right about how to get out of there...anyone who claims he was wrong about the surge hasn't read anything. And so, what McCain's problem with the Iraq issue is that hurts him at the polls, isn't even his own views: it's what Joe Biden says McCain's views are. Because Joe Biden is a liar. In a Sept. 24 speech, Biden said this:

"[Mccain] would continue what he called the Bush administration’s wrong-headed approach to the conflicts in the Middle East, endangering American security.

Cute, but Biden was arm-in-arm with McCain about Iraq a year ago.

From the Congressional voting record encyclopedia:
Iraq War position

Biden agreed with the administration's assertion that Saddam Hussein needed to be eliminated. The Bush administration rejected an effort Biden undertook with Sen. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) to pass a resolution authorizing military action only after the exhaustion of diplomatic efforts. In October 2002, Biden supported the final resolution of support for War in Iraq. He continues to support the war effort and appropriations to pay for it, but has argued repeatedly that more soldiers are needed, the war should be internationalized, and the Bush administration should "level with the American people" about the cost and length of the conflict.

More (I actually admire Biden's fervent resistance on the surge, but he's just wrong):
"I want to make it clear that I totally oppose the surging of additional American troops into Baghdad... I think it is contrary to the overwhelming body of informed opinion... A surge of up to 30,000 American troops cannot have any positive effect except for only temporary... We have to make it clear to the Iraqis that in this quarter, we're going to begin to draw down American troops... The overwhelming reason for that is we must force a political settlement... They must understand that there is no prospect for us to be able to bring peace to Iraq if the Iraqis don't want peace as much as we do." ~ Biden

Then, in one of Biden's most admirable solutions for Iraq, he got legislation on the board, but Bush ignored it because the Republicans had a majority. I read between the lines though, and think that Biden's plan was in effect an "alternative surge" plan:
First Senate bipartisan Iraq war consensus

On September 26, 2007 the Senate approved a non-binding resolution 75-23 which endorsed a political settlement in Iraq that would divide the country into three semi-autonomous regions. With 26 Republican votes it did not force President Bush to take any action, but represented a milestone in the Iraq debate. The plan envisioned a federal government system for Iraq, consisting of separate regions for Iraq’s Shiite, Sunni, and Kurdish populations. ~ Congresspedia

No doubt that plan would have required additional troops to enforce these areas and get them stabilized. 30,000 troops, perhaps? I know that's cruel, but Biden's attempts to illustrate Iraq as one of McCain's faults are somewhat hollow.

McCain still has a chance to win on Tuesday, but he has to insulate himself from all of the dangerous flak coming at him from both the Republican wackos and his Democratic opponents, and convince the American people that he is the more pragmatic leader, not George Bush, Junior.

Lastly, I got this chart in a McCain email today. It's very informative:
Chart