Archive for May, 2007
Thursday May 31, 2007
Posted in Sports on 31 May 2007 by JohnnySunday May 27, 2007
Posted in News on 27 May 2007 by JohnnyProposed new anti-terror laws could give police greater powers to stop and question anyone in the UK. The proposal, allowing police to ask people about their identity and movement, is among measures being considered by Home Secretary John Reid. The new legislation would be similar to that already used in Northern Ireland. Police are still likely to need a “reasonable suspicion” a crime may be committed. Anyone refusing to co-operate could be fined up to £5,000.
At present, under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000, officers already have the power to stop and search people or vehicles in an area seen as being at risk from terrorism even if they are not suspected of any breach of the law. A Home Office spokeswoman said that the new proposals would give officers an automatic right to stop and question anyone in the UK about suspected terrorism.
Well isn’t that lovely? Somewhere along the line, if this is implemented in Britain, can’t you see an American politician pushing something like this? After all, highway checkpoints and no-knock warrants have held up in court, so it’s hard to see a sudden defense of the Fourth Amendment popping up. Are you prepared to show your papers whenever you travel? And if you think racial profiling and instances of police abuse are bad now, what do you think they’d be like when law enforcement can do anything with impunity?
Saturday May 26, 2007
Posted in Thought on 26 May 2007 by JohnnyAnyone seen the movie Red Dawn lately? In case you’re not familiar, it was a mid-80s flick (the first film to carry a PG-13 rating) that chronicled the guerrilla resistance by a group of Colorado teenagers — the Wolverines — to an invasion by the Soviet Union and their Latin American allies. Well, I caught the last third of it on Fuse (no, I’d never heard of it either) this evening … I’ve seen it before, but it had been quite a while. The last time was probably in high school — before 9/11, before the Iraq war. Now the movie has a very different vibe, especially when you see the ringleader (played by Patrick Swayze) wearing an Arab-style head dress … and extremely especially when he justifies an execution of a Soviet prisoner and a fellow fighter that was tortured into collaboration. “Tell me what’s the difference between us and them!” his younger brother (Charlie Sheen) screams as the rifle is lined up. His reply is, simply, “Because we live here!” Might you think that a number of the insurgents in Iraq — those who were initially grateful for the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, but became slightly peeved when we refused to go away — would say something very similar? Consider that my “through the looking glass” moment for the evening.
Now here’s the punchline. At the bottom of the Wikipedia entry is a link to this nugget from a letter to the editor in the Guardian of London: “The operation to capture Saddam Hussein was named Red Dawn and the two possible locations of his hide out Wolverine One and Two. This mission was obviously named after the 1984 John Milius film Red Dawn, where the heroes are a group of freedom fighters called the Wolverines who wage a battle to liberate their country from an unjust foreign army. Who says Americans don’t do irony?” (And yes, it’s true.)
Friday May 25, 2007
Posted in Other on 25 May 2007 by JohnnyIt’s already 81 here at 11am and I’m remembering why my energy bills were so high last summer. For those of you who don’t know, my apartment is directly above a large laundromat. That makes laundry day convenient, but the heat thrown off by dryers is also very intense. That means I don’t have to run the heat unless it’s below 45 (and don’t have to run it overnight unless it’s below 25), but I have to run the air conditioner every time it’s above 75.
Facebook’s going to turn itself into a gimmick factory, the Cavaliers lost another 79-76 game to Detroit (though with the referees’ help this time), a reviewer for Time absolutely rips into the third Pirates of the Caribbean flick, Canadian researchers come up with a completely implausible study, and what is likely the best TV show of the decade (admittedly not a difficult title to claim these days) is consigned to the scrap-heap of history. And I’m not the only one singing its praises.
Incidentally, I feel the need to slap Sen. Sam Brownback (R-KS), long-shot presidential candidate, upside the head with a blunt object. On the blank check, business-as-usual, no-strings-attached Iraq funding bill that essentially has been the only thing discussed in DC for the last month — HE DIDN’T VOTE. How the hell do you not vote on the issue of our time and expect anyone to take you seriously as a potential leader of the free world? I don’t care if you’re in Antarctica — you charter a plane back to Washington and you put yourself on the record. Pansy.
Friday May 25, 2007
Posted in Other on 25 May 2007 by JohnnyHere’s Keith Olbermann’s latest special comment from last night and Rep. John Boehner (House minority leader, R-OH) from this afternoon. No, their speeches are not from parallel universes. If you don’t have time for all of it, watch the last minute and a half of each. Can you imagine a more striking contrast? For that matter, which of them do you think should be in Congress?
Tuesday May 22, 2007
Posted in News on 22 May 2007 by JohnnyThe start and finish of an op-ed on the New York Times website, written by Jean Edward Smith, professor of political science at Marshall University:
For more than a generation, Americans have been told that government is the problem, not the solution. The mantra can be traced back to Barry Goldwater’s presidential bid in 1964. It provided the mind-set for the Reagan administration, and it has come to ultimate fruition during the presidency of George W. Bush.
On college campuses and at think tanks across the country, libertarian scholars stoke the urge to eliminate government from our lives. This thinking has led to the privatization of vital government functions such as the care of disabled veterans, the appointment to regulatory commissions of members at odds with the regulations they are sworn to enforce, the refusal of the Environmental Protection Agency to protect the environment, and the surrender of the government’s management of military operations to profit-seeking contractors.
[...]
The ideological obsession of the Bush administration to diminish the role of government has served the country badly. But perhaps this government’s demonstrated inability to improve the lives of ordinary Americans will ensure that future efforts to “repeal the New Deal” are not successful.
Wow. That’s … wow. Okay. Give me a moment to reattach my jaw to my face.
I have no problem with someone being a Democratic shill, but please come up with a charge that is at least not completely laughable on its face. Since when did “libertarian” become a codeword for incompetence and nepotism? And, um, what part of the New Deal did Bush try to repeal, exactly? When was a government department eliminated, or a major regulation repealed, or an entitlement cut back in the last six and a half years? Oh, right. Bush did THE EXACT OPPOSITE OF ALL THOSE THINGS. This would be utterly hysterical if it wasn’t published as a serious editorial on the website of the national paper of record.
Using the power of government for a different goal is not the same as lessening the power of government. It’s thoroughly amazing that the left feels the need to fight a ghost here. It won. Libertarianism, politically, is dead. The government has the largest budget ever and more power than at any point in our nation’s history outside of the three big wars. (And no, the “global war on terror” doesn’t count. Don’t make me slap you, neocons.) And when a Democrat takes over the Oval Office in 2009 — and seriously, if they don’t, they should just give up — I’m presuming that the New York Times will suddenly feel like everything is exactly as they would like it in Washington.
Tuesday May 15, 2007
Posted in Thought on 15 May 2007 by JohnnyCleveland did just — and I repeat JUST — enough to pull that one out. The offense was fairly weak but the defense showed up in the clutch. They ought to seal the deal Wednesday night and move on to the conference finals for the third time in franchise history. It’s a good thing too, because the fans of New Jersey don’t deserve to have a winning basketball team. Clearly, the Rutgers football fan base — which showed itself to be the best I’ve ever seen in the amazing L’ville game — is not indicative of the dedication and intellect of other fans in this state. Nets supporters ought to be thoroughly ashamed of themselves. Why?
(1) You might want to consider showing up on time. I know 7:00 pm doesn’t leave much time after work, but if you ponied up for tickets, please arrive in a vaguely punctual manner. The arena was only 2/3 full in the first quarter and I had the row to myself. Some people didn’t arrive until the third quarter and the arena never did fill up because the game wasn’t sold out in the first place. How do you not sell out a playoff game?
(2) You needed the video boards and music to tell you what to do. There was never more than five seconds’ pause between random goofy sounds or obnoxious graphics with fake decibel meters. There was an absurd amount of cheering whenever the Cavaliers committed a traveling violation because there was a multimedia flourish attached to it, while critical plays merited no reaction because there were no noises. During large parts of the first three quarters, the arena was pretty much silent … and if there hadn’t been the constant prodding, it might as well have been a Cleveland home game, because everyone would have sat on their hands.
(3) You talked on your cell phones at your seat. There are very few circumstances where this is acceptable, and most of them involve life-and-death situations or other dire crises. Go out into the concourse and talk there. If push really comes to shove, use text messaging so you don’t bother the hell out of every person within twenty feet of you. If you don’t care enough to pay attention to the game, you shouldn’t be there. If you explicitly call up your friends and scream to them that you’re at the basketball game, then have to explain to them what you mean, then you REALLY shouldn’t be there. (This especially includes those who prod players to “go get the ball!” in the same tone of voice that one addresses a puppy.)
(4) You used the Thundersticks. Granted, the team provided them to you for free, but you could have resisted them. They were a cute one-year novelty act in 2002 when Anaheim won the World Series, but now it’s gone on long enough. Use your damn hands to clap like normal people so it doesn’t sound like the stadium is made of bubble wrap. This also provides the advantage of not hitting people with the things accidentally. Repeatedly.
(5) You take a sports organization seriously that has a dance team, a “hype team” (cheerleaders), a drumline corps, a guy who performs a knock-off of Stomp with plastic buckets, two mascots, and a pre-game introduction that included flamethrowers and three fireworks displays (which made for a smoky start to the game). If I wanted to spend my evening at a Broadway show, I could have gone across the river, thank you very much. I was waiting for a couple of the dancers to roll across the stage dressed up like sequin-covered basketballs or something. Does anyone come to the games because of this junk? If not, it seems like wasted money.
In short, I’m glad they’re moving this team to Brooklyn upon completion of the Atlantic Yards project. Maybe a more urban fan base can support a team properly … the regular-season game I saw at Madison Square Garden between the Knicks and the lowly Bucks had a far more electric atmosphere than this one.
Tuesday May 8, 2007
Posted in News on 8 May 2007 by JohnnyOn the cover of this week’s US News & World Report, next to a picture of President Bush: “Is he resolute — or delusional?” Well, only 28% are picking the former.
Also, from the “signs of the apocalypse” department: Cheerleading is rapidly globalizing. Not surprisingly, the Chinese are charging fast (while the French suck).
Tuesday May 8, 2007
Posted in News on 8 May 2007 by JohnnyI got this message in my Rutgers inbox, since it’s an AP story that quotes a professor in my department. It really clarifies the origins of the subprime mortgage market collapse that hit the stock market hard a few months back: everyone was incredibly stupid. I mean really, really stupid. Companies lent absurd amounts of money to people either with low incomes or houses beyond their means. You used to have to be able to pay at least 10% up front and have an income of at least 20% of the house’s value … but somewhere along the line, Americans got more money than sense and banks — the same ones that send your dog a pre-approved platinum card — were more than willing to follow suit …
With a second child on the way, Chris Shields and his wife, Michelle, wanted to move from their two-bedroom apartment in Southern California to a house with more space. But because their timing coincided with a shakeout in the mortgage market earlier this year, their credit now isn’t good enough to get a loan to purchase the house they wanted with no money down.
Rising interest rates and falling home prices squeezed a market that had been propped up by risky loans and easy credit during the housing boom. As mortgage bills came due, foreclosures rose, and the easy credit dried up for families like the Shields. “Now we’re stuck in the apartment,” said Shields, 31, a firefighter who lives in Manifee, Calif. His wife gave birth to baby Gabriella at the end of March, and they are running out of space without options for a house.
These mortgages, also called “subprime,” opened up homeownership to people who otherwise couldn’t buy houses because they had weak credit or little money for a down payment. Unlike traditional 30-year fixed mortgages, these loans are often adjustable and payments grow with rising interest rates. The nontraditional loans allowed homeowners to borrow large amounts thanks to low initial “teaser” rates, piggyback loans split into two mortgages, or interest-only payments.
In the past, lenders didn’t want to give mortgages to people with below-average credit because it was risky, said Kathe Newman, a professor at Rutgers University in New Jersey who has studied the subprime market and foreclosures. But the explosion of a secondary market for repurchasing mortgages provided more cash to lenders, and investors were willing to take bigger risks. Technology, such as automated credit scoring, also allowed lenders to quickly assess risk, she said.
The shakeout of the market could have positive benefits, some housing advocates say. Ira Rheingold, executive director of the National Association of Consumer Advocates, said people won’t qualify for loans they can’t afford. “People will have the opportunity to buy homes they can sustain, not the absurdities we’ve been seeing,” he said. “What’s going to happen is only good for homeowners and consumers.” Some people who got into trouble with loans they couldn’t afford have since refinanced with better rates.
Now here comes the crazy part:
Deborah Beatty recognizes that she and her family could lose their home in Jersey City, across the Hudson River from New York, because they can’t afford the mortgage. The newly constructed three-level home offers a view of the Manhattan skyline and the Statue of Liberty from Beatty’s master bedroom window. “I’m going to miss that,” said Beatty, 53, who collects disability payments and does not work. “When I come in, I like to see the lady (the statue), especially when it’s a beautiful clear night.”
Her 29-year-old daughter, a graduate student with an annual income of less than $20,000, qualified for a mortgage of $600,000 with no money down, split into two different loans of 8.75 percent and 12.5 percent. With income from tenants, which didn’t happen right away, Beatty’s daughter thought she could afford monthly payments of nearly $5,000. But she hasn’t made a mortgage payment in more than three months, and she’s receiving letters threatening foreclosure.
Beatty’s daughter had to take out a nontraditional loan because she would not have qualified to borrow that much money through a traditional 30-year-fixed mortgage, said Judith Brzuskiewicz, a loan counselor with Citizen Action, a nonprofit advocacy group that is helping the Beattys and other families avoid foreclosure.
Beatty acknowledged the mortgage was probably too good to be true, and now her house is on the market. The family wouldn’t be able to afford buying another house and would likely rent. “It’s embarrassing. It hurts your pride, your respect.”
Well … honestly? You deserve it. This is freaking absurd. While it doesn’t say how much the house in Jersey City costs, I can tell you from personal experience that it’s a boatload of money. Really pricey housing is popping up all over the place, as even the wealthy are getting priced out of Manhattan. And she doesn’t have an actual job? What the hell was she thinking? Look, I’m compassionate, but if you get into a circumstance entirely on your own accord, then my sympathy is severely curtailed. Did these people look at the monthly payment and just have the number go over their head?
But wow. I’m a graduate student making less than $20,000 … I didn’t know I could qualify for a $600,000 mortgage! Here I am renting an apartment … I guess I’m just a sucker. But the baffling part is the mortgage companies … why would anyone make a loan with such a low probability of being repaid? Idiots, one and all.
Monday May 7, 2007
Posted in News on 7 May 2007 by JohnnyGardai (Irish police) say a series of demonstrations by truck drivers in the morning will severely disrupt traffic around Dublin for several hours. Up to 300 vehicles will take part in the protests which are being organised by the Road Transport Association.
So what exactly are they protesting?
The truck drivers say delays on the M50 motorway are costing them money.
Well then. That makes perfect sense.
More importantly: Self-government comes to Northern Ireland (to stay?) tomorrow.
