Because I Can

In a free society, you are never compelled to say "yes sir" to this statement if acting on your own. If working for a corporation, you are to follow certain guidelines - those guidelines being "yes" in general, but "no" in specific cases. But to be fair, you are for all practical purposes usually compelled to say "yes sir" because you want that person's money.

NBC Rejected some rather harmless ads, claiming that the invitation to the group's website was far to politically charged and controversial. A strange guideline, considering that I have yet to see an NBC ban on political ads. Now if this were a public university, then this would be a bigger issue, since public universities are institutions which rely on the state for their funding. But for a private television network, that's within their rights.

The article also mentions the following with Fox News:

Earlier this week, the Fox News Channel rejected a television commercial from a liberal group that featured actor Danny Glover denouncing what he said were U.S. acts of rendition, torture and detention. The spot, created for the Center for Constitutional Rights, showed pages being shredded while Glover says: "The Bush administration is destroying the Constitution."

Fox senior vice president for advertising Paul Rittenberg said the network asked the group to provide backup information _ from news accounts or legal scholars _ supporting Glover's claim that acts by the Bush administration threatened the Constitution.

"In this case, saying the president is destroying the Constitution frankly sounds like a claim that is fairly extreme," Rittenberg said. "Who else thinks this? Of course Dann Glover can say that, but does anyone else say that?"

Again, this is well within Fox's rights. It just happens to be very weird, and one has to wonder if they hold their other advertisers to task on that. Remember that if you ever see an ad for weight loss drugs or exercise equipment on Fox News.

Now, had NBC taken FreedomsWatch's money, they should air the ads, but that's not what's in question. It just seems like a questionable move that cost them some money.

But it doesn't end there. Newt Gingrich wants to boycott NBC (for a more favorable and enjoyable clip of Newt, see his appearance on Da Ali G Show here). Seems a bit extreme, but maybe the message is that freedom isn't free. For what it's worth, I'd like to see who would boycott Fox News, given its viewers are mostly conservatives anyway. I also wonder how many people would follow Newt's advice, and then change their mind when new episodes of The Office are on.

Labels: Other News Items

Ann Coulter made the following remarks about John Edwards:

“I was going to have a few comments on the other Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards, but it turns out you have to go into rehab if you use the word ‘faggot,’ so I — so kind of an impasse, can’t really talk about Edwards.”

Later adding:

“C’mon, it was a joke. I would never insult gays by suggesting that they are like John Edwards. That would be mean.”

Ann Coulter is not in the least bit politically correct or out of character. This isn't even that funny either. Consider, though, this line from the Edwards campaign:

“John was singled out for a personal attack because the Republican establishment knows he poses the greatest threat to their power,” said his campaign manager, David E. Bonior. “Since they have nothing real to use against him, Coulter’s resorting to the classic right-wing strategy of riling up hate to smear a progressive champion.”

Here you have John Edwards, who lost his home state of North Carolina in 2004, asserting that he is the greatest threat to power to the Republican party. That is much funnier.

Labels: Other News Items, Politics

Bryan Caplan is a proud subscriber to satellite radio, and has a few things to say about the merger. My intentions are not to talk about the public choice and benefits for consumers, though; rather I want to talk about why nobody wants to waste their money on that crap.

Caplan states in his post, in the parentheses:

I pre-paid XM for five years, and I get nervous every time I poll my undergrads and find that none of them subscribe.

Now why could this be? Actually, there are about a billion reasons for this, but here are the easiest ones.

1. Undergraduate college students gain more utility from normal radio stations than Caplan. A large part of this has to do with Caplan's taste for classical music, which is not popular among younger people, generally.
   
   
2. Undergraduate college students have lower levels of income, so the trade-off is much higher than it is for Caplan. This kinda goes with #1, but still.
   
   
3. Nobody listens to radio by itself. The radio is something that people listen to while multitasking, rather than just sitting there and listening. It's one thing to listen to the radio at work, but who watches ESPN while they're on the job? People listen to morning radio more than anything, because that's what wakes them up on their clock radios, it's what they listen to in their cars, etc, and a huge part of that is the news and traffic reports.
   
   
4. There is nothing special about listening to the radio at all. Back when the radio aired dramas, etc just like television shows, everyone gathered around and listened. At the time, there were three TV channels. But most of what is on the radio is music or talk shows. Of that music, very little of it is live or exclusive; rather, most of it is readily available for purchase at your local record store, or on iTunes, or you can download it legally, or illegally. Radio is basically what life would be like if all TV channels were like TBS (without the Braves games) and TV-Land. While it provides a variety, this can be overcome by getting an iPod and finding some way to hook it up to your car. Or in your office.
   
   Even the sports content on satellite radio isn't that special. You can sit at your computer and get it just as easily.

But that's my take on the whole thing. Even if I had the money for such a thing, I'd prefer the one-time fixed-cost iPod to the variable cost satellite radio.

Labels: Economic Stuff, Other News Items

Tim Hardaway, who obviously doesn't care what people think, decided to say this:

"You know, I hate gay people, so I let it be known," Hardaway said. "I don't
like gay people and I don't like to be around gay people. I am homophobic. I
don't like it. It shouldn't be in the world or in the United States."

He's retired, so he doesn't care about anything. What makes this particularly amusing is that on Pardon The Interruption on ESPN, Charles Barkley said that he has gay friends and played with a couple of gay guys. If you get more public outrage than Charles Barkley, then that's something to stare at.

But I have no idea why Hardaway said that, or for that matter felt that. I mean, that's pretty harsh to say you wouldn't want the guy as a teammate, just because he went 1 for 13 from behind the arc and never played for the Rockets after he was traded to them for Glen Rice. He made an apology, and for once someone actually cares that it's not a genuine apology because he didn't apologize for how he felt, just what he said.

Hope Hardaway didn't blow all his money, because he'll have a hard time getting endorsements now.

Labels: NBA, Other News Items

It occurred to me that people may forget just how awful this year's superbowl commercials were. The chest-hair ripping, suicidal robot, and old Coke commercials were utterly worthless, and those who spent their time, stayed at the office late, wasted part of their lives putting them together. Madison Avenue should be kicking their own asses when a user-generated commercial beats their stuff out, except for the Fed Ex and the Bud Lite commercials.

I want to challenge everyone to remember this next year. Advertisers should be given an oppurtunity to recant. In the event that they do so, and the commercials are decent, then pardon them, and do what you usually do. If another series of commercial breaks matches last year's superbowl, then screw the commercials. If any of them are actually any good you can check them out on YouTube anyway (I don't think any advertiser will complain that people are watching their copyrighted commercials). Then nothing bad will happen.

In the event, however, that the commercials are as bad or worse, then it is time to realize that just like any other commericials, Superbowl commercials are useless and should just be skipped. Flip through the channels instead. If you're not a football fan, then you have 4 hours of your life back on a Sunday night. But you'll probably waste it, by reading this blog, or watching good commercials on youtube.

Labels: Other News Items, Superbowl Ads

Ok, here's the gag: the state of Virginia is proposing an apology for slavery. Yeah, slavery's bad, mmm-kay. This 140 years after slavery was abolished by the 13th amendment to the Constitution. "We're sorry that people we've never met but are related to enslaved people you've never met but are related to."

But then it gets really funny. A delegate in the General Assembly said no. And he didn't just say no, he said a few more words. Frank Hargrove, R-Hanover, said this, as stated in the Times-Dispatch:

Regarding slavery, Hargrove said "black citizens should get over it" and that
asking the state to apologize for slavery is akin to asking Jews to apologize
for killing Christ.

Hargrove did not add that he felt that importing and enslaving Africans was necessary to salvation, so we might have to ask if that one's a fair assumption. Or perhaps he meant that the abolition of slavery was similar to Christ's resurrection.

Nonetheless, these remarks scared the governor, Tim Kaine. Kaine immediately was frightened that this would lead everyone to think that such a person was typical of Virginians. Granted, the only people who will think that are the people who think that Fred Phelps is a legitimate Christian leader, and they're just a bunch of idiots anyway. But whatever.

The stupid resolution, the crazy delegate, and the paranoid governor. Once again in Richmond, the Circus is in town early.

Labels: Other News Items, Politics

I saw on the news, yesterday I guess, an item about a couple who went to a Baltimore Orioles game and were arrested. A little more information has come out about the whole thing, but here's the recap of what happened. Essentially, the couple got lost on the way over to Camden Yards, and got lost coming out.

The couple stopped in the 800 block of Bridgeview Drive in Cherry Hill to
ask a Baltimore police officer for directions. Brook said the officer was blunt:
“You found your way in. You can find your way out.”

After writing a citation for failure to obey a stop sign — a ticket Kelly
disputes — the officer told them to leave. Confused, the couple drove about “40
feet” and stopped.

“We still didn’t know how to get out,” Kelly said.

But the officer pulled up behind them and arrested Kelly for “trespassing,”
according to the ticket.

“The officer said we were on private property,” Brook said. “But we were parked on a public street.”

Kelly said the officer told him that “no trespassing signs” were evident “up and down the block,” but he didn’t see any.

After Kelly’s arrest, Brook said, she was told to “get lost.” But because the car was being impounded, she didn’t know what to do.

“I didn’t know where to go, so [the officer] arrested me.”

There is, of course, a bit more to the story, which one would hope with the extremity of the account. From the Baltimore Sun

A Baltimore police officer who arrested a young Virginia couple who claim
they were asking for directions after getting lost in a South Baltimore
neighborhood stated in a report that the driver argued with her and tried to
tear a ticket out of a citation book.

Officer Natalie N. Preston wrote in police documents that, after she
ticketed the driver for running a stop sign on Round Road in Cherry Hill, the
man held onto her pen before she grabbed it back and that he then refused to
leave, prompting her to arrest him and his girlfriend on suspicion of
trespassing on public housing property and failing to obey a lawful order.

The account offers the first explanation of the arrests from police
after complaints by the couple in which they said they were arrested after
asking an officer how to leave South Baltimore's Cherry Hill neighborhood.

Authorities declined to elaborate on the police report yesterday, saying
the matter is being investigated by the department's Internal Affairs Division.

Prosecutors at Central Booking and Intake Center, where Joshua Kelley, 22,
and Llara Brook, 20, were taken after their arrest, reviewed the officer's
statement and decided not to pursue the case.

"This did not rise to a case that we believe should be criminally
prosecuted," said spokeswoman Margaret T. Burns. She said the couple, who were
arrested Saturday evening, were held at Central Booking for more than eight
hours until prosecutors ordered them released without charges.

Police said the stop occurred about 8:25 p.m. Saturday when an officer
stopped them near Round and Bridgeview roads.

Well that seems to tell a bit more. It was dark, and the officer was unsure what this couple was doing in the neighborhood.

The officer claimed that there were signs around that said no trespassing, but based on some experience I have had, police officers always know where all the signs are in the area, even if the drivers don't. It is possible that the signs got caught up in the brush, etc.

Now I can understand the officer getting apprehensive if the driver did actually try to tear the ticket out of the officer's citation book, because that is a belligerent act, no question. Arresting the couple does seem to be a bit over the line though. When arresting someone, police officers have high standards so that prosecutors do not dismiss charges so quickly, but this looks like the officer could not control her temper. That the officer would hold out-of-towners on trespassing charges is also a bit absurd, especially after they asked for directions. After seeing out-of-state plates the officer should have gotten the idea that the couple was lost, and that people in unfamiliar areas often miss street signs. The officer instead played a ticket trap that is more stereotypical of one-horse drive-through towns that want revenue from passing travelers, suggesting that perhaps she should be fired and find work in such a town.

I had a similar experience getting lost in Baltimore, but fortunately for me, it was during the daytime. That says something though; the stadium parking lots for Camden Yards are horribly marked; they are not labled along the sides very well, and signs are put in place poorly. Perhaps Virgina is just good at putting up signs, but that is no reason for Maryland to do a poor job in such an area. Had I gone to a night game in Oriole Park, I could have been just as horribly lost, certainly. There is something to take away from this. I am rather sure that Joshua Kelley has learned his lesson and will not listen to his girlfriend, or any woman, again if prompted to ask for directions.

Besides a bad joke, this is bad for Baltimore, and bad for the Orioles. This is a couple from Chantilly, VA, and now if they want to see Major League Baseball, they have every reason to go to RFK instead. They can park at the Metro station for free on the weekends, and sit and read the Post to find out who's starting and how yesterday's game went. Peter Angelos was very much worried about losing fans to the Nationals, and despite the quality of the team, the Nationals will continue to draw fans. John Patterson will return from injury, Livan Hernandez will pitch like Livan Hernandez, and Ramon Ortiz will get kicked out of the starting rotation (sure he won, but everyone's beating the Cubs right now; the fact is he has a WHIP over 1.7 and he hasn't been good since 2002).

Labels: Other News Items

Well, Drudge has reported what critics of sexual harassment policies fear: a stupid case in which an innocent first grade boy gets sent home. As the AP reports:

A first grader was suspended for three days after school officials said he sexually harassed a girl in his class by allegedly putting two fingers inside the girl's waistband while she sat on the floor in front of him.

The boy's mother, Berthena Dorinvil, said she "screamed" about last week's suspension from Downey Elementary School, and added her son doesn't know what sexual harassment is.

"He doesn't know those things," she told The Enterprise of Brockton. "He's only 6 years old."

Berthena Dorinvil claims that her son was already touched by the girl. Either way, one serious question arises: Why wasn't the old rule of "keep your hands to yourself" ever instilled in this child?

That's one of those things that can be picked up at age 3, even if the kid wasn't in a day care environment. All it takes is for the kid's parents to realize that they exist for more reason than production and financial support of the child. The concept of not touching other kids is easy enough, and the rule about specific no-no touchie spots is always areas covered by the swimsuit. Kids should learn this at least from their parents. I learned it from them, teachers, and television (they ran little bits in between cartoons saying that you should tell if you're touched somewhere like that, etc).

I fully believe that corporal punishment should be employed here. I think the principal needs to take the kid's mom and turn her over her knee.

Labels: Other News Items

Marcus Vick, the younger brother of Michael Vick, who has been nothing but trouble for Virginia Tech finally got kicked off the team. What was most revealing, though, was the information about an arrest:

Vick might have avoided dismissal had news not broken Friday that he has a
hearing on Jan. 17 for traffic violations stemming from a Dec. 17 arrest. He was
charged with going 38 in a 25 mph zone and driving on a suspended
license.
The offenses occurred the day Tech players began pre-Gator Bowl
preparations with a 1 p.m. team run in Blacksburg. In July 2004, Vick was
arrested for reckless driving and possession of marijuana. That arrest followed
an arrest earlier in the year on charges of contributing to the delinquency of a
minor. Those legal troubles led to his suspension from school for the fall, 2004
semester. He was reinstated with the stipulation that further trouble would lead
to his dismissal.

Information about legal problems that did not make the media until now. This is nothing new for the Vick family, as his older brother Michael, had a lawsuit drawn against him. According to the Smoking Gun,

a 26-year-old health care worker, was infected with the sexually
transmitted disease in April 2003 after an unprotected encounter with Vick at
the athlete's Duluth, Georgia home.

adding to that

Elliott's complaint also contends that Vick "apologized profusely" for not
telling her he was infected with the STD.

So that's the awful truth. But it cannot stay that way, of course. It has to get funny; it's on smokinggun.com, after all.

Elliot's lawsuit alleges that Vick has used the name "Ron Mexico" and, in a
related court filing, her lawyers are seeking Vick's admission that he used the
"Mexico" alias--and perhaps other fake names--"for the purpose of herpes testing
and/or treatment."

Ron Mexico. Wikipedia has a great section on this on their Michael Vick page. What's really fascinating, also, is that you too can come up with your own bogus name for just such an emergency as Vick's. All you need to do is to go to the Ron Mexico Name Generator. Marcus Vick's new pseudonym is Hank Bosnia.

Nomar Garciaparra's nickname is Guy California.

And Osama bin Laden is Kurt Zambia!

Labels: Other News Items