When photographs showing Michael Phelps smoking pot came out, he handled the situation rather maturely. After his fairly reasonable attempts at disappearing the pictures failed (if I remember correctly he offered to write articles for the paper if they agreed to not publish), Phelps immediately admitted the legitimacy of the pictures and apologized for "[...] behavior which was regrettable and demonstrated bad judgment." Phelps did not attempt to change public opinion on marijuana laws, or to gain special treatment by qualifying his actions; rather, Phelps said, "I'm 23 years old and despite the successes I've had in the pool, I acted in a youthful and inappropriate way, not in a manner people have come to expect from me. [...] For this, I am sorry. I promise my fans and the public it will not happen again." I disagree with the furor over Phelps' slip-up, but I do not think this situation could have been handled in a more professional manner. Phelps even went on to say that his suspension of three months was fair and warranted. Class act all around.
I can finally get to my point: a 23 year-old swimmer should not be acting more maturely and with more grace than, I don't know, maybe a Super Bowl-winning receiver or a Gold-Glove winning infielder. This isn't to say that Phelps should lower his standards, but that Plaxico and A-Roid show raise theirs.
Plaxico is not only a jerk who shot himself in the leg in a nightclub because he was holding a gun in the waistband of a pair of sweatpants, but also a person who doesn't pay any bills on time. Seriously. He has been sued at least nine times for unpaid debts since he entered the NFL in 2000. That is an average of once a year if we are generous and include 2009. Once he even paid a debt (only after a court ruling) with a check that bounced! This guy is less than two years into a five-year, $27.25 million contract, which tells me he is just being a dick for no reason. If shooting himself in the leg doesn't change his attitude, I doubt he will ever come to the point where he can be respected in the way that Phelps was and should be again.
My other example is one that is near and dear to my heart, Mr. Alex Rodriguez! I had my own reasons for hating the guy, so I was quite happy when the Red Sox 'lost' the chase for Rodriguez and the Yankees signed him to a record-breaking contract. [My hatred stemmed from both interviews watched on TV and a game I attended where A-Rod, after turning an inning-ending double play while playing for the Rangers, pretended to throw the ball to the crowd, laughed, and then took the ball into the dugout. Dick.] Now that he has finally admitted to using illegal performance enhancing drugs I can relax knowing that if he goes down as one of the best players ever it will be with a giant asterisk next to all of his statistics. I can only hope that the asterisk is composed of three syringes...a guy can dream, can't he?
A much fun as it is to watch sports stars run their names into the ground I truly hope that rookies everywhere are forced to take notes on Phelps' handling of the controversy surrounding his pot smoking. As always, money cannot buy class or grace under pressure, as Michael Vick, A-Rod, and Burress can all tell you.
February 09, 2009
Coldplay steal the show...and a song.
Long story short, Coldplay seems to have written the song "Viva la Vida" by simply copying the Joe Satriani song "If I Could Fly." Originally Joe Satriani planned to serve Coldplay with a copyright infringement lawsuit at the Grammys by hiring a bunch of servers to scour the venue. In the end, Satriani's lawyer was contacted by a lawyer representing the band who said he would accept the papers without the drama of a Grammy-night hunt for the band.
Here's a YouTube video that plays relevant sections of both Coldplay's "Viva la Vida" and Joe Satriani's "If I Could Fly." Satriani's song is from his 2004 album Is There Love In Space?, while Coldplay's is from their 2008 album Viva la Vida or Death and All His Friends.
For reference: the complete Coldplay song; the complete Satriani song.
For those of you interested in the music theory behind this claim here are two videos in which a guy from Creative Guitar Studios in California analyzes the theoretical similarities between the two songs. Video 1. Video 2.
Satriani is suing for any and all profits related to the copyright infringement, and considering the popularity of "Viva la Vida" he stands to gain quite nicely from this (especially when one considers the bump in name recognition for Satriani).
Here's a YouTube video that plays relevant sections of both Coldplay's "Viva la Vida" and Joe Satriani's "If I Could Fly." Satriani's song is from his 2004 album Is There Love In Space?, while Coldplay's is from their 2008 album Viva la Vida or Death and All His Friends.
For reference: the complete Coldplay song; the complete Satriani song.
For those of you interested in the music theory behind this claim here are two videos in which a guy from Creative Guitar Studios in California analyzes the theoretical similarities between the two songs. Video 1. Video 2.
Satriani is suing for any and all profits related to the copyright infringement, and considering the popularity of "Viva la Vida" he stands to gain quite nicely from this (especially when one considers the bump in name recognition for Satriani).
February 06, 2009
Buy Ya Own Damn Fries! (Updated)
The only thing that could have won John McCain the presidency.
(Story)
(Story - Better Link)
Other great soundbytes:
That guy
Complicated
Sure, baby
High school chicks, University chicks - it don't matter!
My personal favorite, which I hope was what he said to George W. Bush at 12:01 PM on 1/20.
And then there's you
(Story)
(Story - Better Link)
Other great soundbytes:
That guy
Complicated
Sure, baby
High school chicks, University chicks - it don't matter!
My personal favorite, which I hope was what he said to George W. Bush at 12:01 PM on 1/20.
And then there's you
SAT Time!
Bush : PATRIOT Act :: Obama : Stimulus Bill
I'm becoming more and more convinced that external circumstances allowed both men to pass measures reflective of the more extreme side of their ideology under blankets of fear and urgency, bills that would have had no chance of passing in more normal times.
I'm not saying everyone's gonna be with me on this one, but I've decided that's my view.
I'm becoming more and more convinced that external circumstances allowed both men to pass measures reflective of the more extreme side of their ideology under blankets of fear and urgency, bills that would have had no chance of passing in more normal times.
I'm not saying everyone's gonna be with me on this one, but I've decided that's my view.
February 05, 2009
FYI- The President wrote an article
That's right, we have confirmation that not only can Barack Obama speak, he can also write, an ability that is as yet unconfirmed in our previous commander-in-chief.
Bart's Morning Thoughts (None of them stolen from other posts!)
Walgreens
Gains in efficiency are always impressive, but not this impressive. Walgreens has created a warehouse that is twenty percent more efficient than any of its other plants. Their secret? Disabilities. The warehouse is designed to use the disabilities of workers for gain. For example, a lot of their IT work is done by those with Asperger syndrome because many with the disease become fascinated by technology and can understand it very well. Walgreens was inspired by one of its executives who feared the permanent dependence of his son on caretakers. Now it seems as if the son may be able to not only find work but to excel in it. I hope to see this scaled up soon, because this seems to be the employment equivalent of price discrimination: get the most benefit (read: production) out of each and every person by considering their individual circumstances, desires, and needs. Bravo, Walgreens.
Pakistan
To bring you down from the high provided by that new-age feel-goodery Walgreens I bring you “The Gunmarkets of Pakistan.” (So far as I can tell the guys who made the video consider gunmarkets to be an actual word. Whatever.) The host of the video had his Pakistani mother make a few phone calls to her friends, who were able to arrange for the host to enter the most dangerous regions of Pakistan to buy weapons. The video catalogues the trip to visit the weapons producers of the region (read: villagers making Kalashnikovs by hand).
Dr. Death
Let’s finish off with a slightly less depressing story: Dr. Death has been found, but he is already dead. After escaping Germany in the 1960s (yes, the 1960s, not the 1940s) Dr. Aribert Heim was able to make it to Cairo, where he lived out his life under an adopted name and converted to Islam (Assumedly he converted from Nazism?). The NYT found this out by recovering a briefcase full of Heim’s personal documents and correspondence. It seems this may herald the end of Nazi-hunting, as the Simon Wiesenthal Center considered Heim to be their top target and was about to up the reward for Heim’s capture to $1.3M. It kind of creeps me out when Dr. Death is referred to fondly as “Uncle Tarek.” Let me know if it does the same for you.
Gains in efficiency are always impressive, but not this impressive. Walgreens has created a warehouse that is twenty percent more efficient than any of its other plants. Their secret? Disabilities. The warehouse is designed to use the disabilities of workers for gain. For example, a lot of their IT work is done by those with Asperger syndrome because many with the disease become fascinated by technology and can understand it very well. Walgreens was inspired by one of its executives who feared the permanent dependence of his son on caretakers. Now it seems as if the son may be able to not only find work but to excel in it. I hope to see this scaled up soon, because this seems to be the employment equivalent of price discrimination: get the most benefit (read: production) out of each and every person by considering their individual circumstances, desires, and needs. Bravo, Walgreens.
Pakistan
To bring you down from the high provided by that new-age feel-goodery Walgreens I bring you “The Gunmarkets of Pakistan.” (So far as I can tell the guys who made the video consider gunmarkets to be an actual word. Whatever.) The host of the video had his Pakistani mother make a few phone calls to her friends, who were able to arrange for the host to enter the most dangerous regions of Pakistan to buy weapons. The video catalogues the trip to visit the weapons producers of the region (read: villagers making Kalashnikovs by hand).
Dr. Death
Let’s finish off with a slightly less depressing story: Dr. Death has been found, but he is already dead. After escaping Germany in the 1960s (yes, the 1960s, not the 1940s) Dr. Aribert Heim was able to make it to Cairo, where he lived out his life under an adopted name and converted to Islam (Assumedly he converted from Nazism?). The NYT found this out by recovering a briefcase full of Heim’s personal documents and correspondence. It seems this may herald the end of Nazi-hunting, as the Simon Wiesenthal Center considered Heim to be their top target and was about to up the reward for Heim’s capture to $1.3M. It kind of creeps me out when Dr. Death is referred to fondly as “Uncle Tarek.” Let me know if it does the same for you.
Morning Thoughts
I strongly disagree with the President's decision to cap executive pay at $500K for (some) bailout recipients. I certainly think he has the right - you want our money, we make the rules - but I think something like $5 million would have been fine. Like it or not, some of these "executives" are not actually spawn of Satan and some of them are very talented. Why would they work for $500K if they could get $10M elsewhere? Especially if they, say, have taken out a mortgage based on future expectations of salary. And I'll just say it - if you're a powerful, wealthy person living in New York City, $500K is not a lot of money.
So, it's clearly written from the perspective of a whiner, but this article about Obama capping total compensation at $500K when his total compensation is quite a bit higher was actually worth reading.
Glenn Beck is willing to go all-in on Obama being a Communist. The last 15 seconds are classic.
Tim Geithner did know he owed the other half of the Social Security and Medicare taxes (if you don't know, US employers pay half of these taxes and you pay the other half. Americans working for int'l organizations are still on the hook for the whole thing even though their employer won't pay it. Geither claims that missing this was the mistake in question). How do we know he knew? He applied - and received - reimbursement for the taxes from the IMF. He later acknowledged a failure to pay the taxes, but didn't actually pay them until his nomination was dicussed. It's all right here in this brochure. (For the record, I don't put a lot into the "rough estimate of $600B" that the article mentions.)
PS - As I was labeling this post, it just made me realize - I want to make it clear that I know I've switched from using "bailout" to using "stimulus", even though the media's switch was arbitrary/socialist.
PPS - I know I've been a little overboard about this recently, but I stand by my "incorrect" ordering of quotation marks and commas above. I used to refer to the "Government Bailout" but I've never referred to the "Stimulus, Package" so I see no reason to put the comma inside the quotation mark.
PPPS - In the first paragraph I said $500K isn't a lot of money for wealthy, powerful New Yorkers. But it's really not a whole lot of money for anyone. Think of it this way, New Yorkers - the proportion of my income that goes to rent is 5.5% before taxes and 7.4% after taxes. Divide your rent by those numbers to see what your income would be if your rent was the same as it is now but it only took the same amount of your income as mine does. My figures do not include utilities.
So, it's clearly written from the perspective of a whiner, but this article about Obama capping total compensation at $500K when his total compensation is quite a bit higher was actually worth reading.
Glenn Beck is willing to go all-in on Obama being a Communist. The last 15 seconds are classic.
Tim Geithner did know he owed the other half of the Social Security and Medicare taxes (if you don't know, US employers pay half of these taxes and you pay the other half. Americans working for int'l organizations are still on the hook for the whole thing even though their employer won't pay it. Geither claims that missing this was the mistake in question). How do we know he knew? He applied - and received - reimbursement for the taxes from the IMF. He later acknowledged a failure to pay the taxes, but didn't actually pay them until his nomination was dicussed. It's all right here in this brochure. (For the record, I don't put a lot into the "rough estimate of $600B" that the article mentions.)
PS - As I was labeling this post, it just made me realize - I want to make it clear that I know I've switched from using "bailout" to using "stimulus", even though the media's switch was arbitrary/socialist.
PPS - I know I've been a little overboard about this recently, but I stand by my "incorrect" ordering of quotation marks and commas above. I used to refer to the "Government Bailout" but I've never referred to the "Stimulus, Package" so I see no reason to put the comma inside the quotation mark.
PPPS - In the first paragraph I said $500K isn't a lot of money for wealthy, powerful New Yorkers. But it's really not a whole lot of money for anyone. Think of it this way, New Yorkers - the proportion of my income that goes to rent is 5.5% before taxes and 7.4% after taxes. Divide your rent by those numbers to see what your income would be if your rent was the same as it is now but it only took the same amount of your income as mine does. My figures do not include utilities.
February 04, 2009
Where is the Stimulus Money Going?
I wanted to know, and Obama's only competition for God-on-Earth (Wikipedia) came to the rescue.
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
Election 2008 Analysis
Ok, so I finally got around to analyzing my election predictions. Here's a table.
I correctly predicted the outcome of 50 of the 51 states, missing Indiana.
Unless otherwise noted, I am omitting DC and HI from my analysis. These states were not only significant leverage points as indicated by severe values of the Cook's D statistic, but also represented significant outliers based on their studentized residuals. Because of this and the dismal amount of polling in both states, I have omitted them. (This, by the way, is how statisticians say "these data really screwed up my model so I took 'em out.")
I missed statewise margin of victory by {3.1 average, 2.2 median}. I was closest to correctly guessing the outcome in New Hampshire (which is just dumb luck; that state was crazy!). I predicted 54.5-44.7; the outcome was 54.1-44.5, a net error of 0.16 points. I was farthest from correctly guessing the outcome in Arkansas (damn PUMAs!) - I predicted a 9.3 pt McCain victory; he won the state by 19.9 pts, an error of 10.56 points.
The regression model treated me nicely.
The first plot shows my prediction line (red) and where each state actually fell (blue).
The second plot shows my prediction (x-axis) with my prediction error (y-axis).
Highlighting +/- 4.00 was arbitrary.
My regression intercept has a p-value of 0.484, indicating there is absolutely no evidence that my average prediction varied significantly from the average actual outcome.
The model in total has a p-value of 0.000000000000000000000000000000000224, which besides being an awesomely small number, also indicates the probability of beating my model by chance alone.
On the down side, the regression model coefficient of 1.124 had a 95% CI of {1.057, 1.192}. Because 1.000 is not in this interval, this indictates that my model significantly underpredicted the average differential in each state (for either candidate; in other words, I gave Obama too much credit in red states and McCain too much credit in blue states, etc.).
Finally, my model scored an r-square value of 0.960. In other words, if each state's outcome was determined by the results of 100 coin flips, having my model in hand would be analogous to already knowing the outcome of 96 of the flips. Or to use another analogy, it would be like predicting the rankings of teams in baseball standings for a 162-game season while already knowing how the first 156 games turn out.
And just for curiosity's sake, I was joking about being unjustified in removing HI and DC. While it's true I missed them both by large margins (especially HI), it's clear in the picture below why DC (off to the right) is overly influential in determining the line of best fit. (HI is the point at 23, 45).
Had I included the two states, r-squared drops from 0.960 to 0.956 and significance actually decreases (that's good) from 2E-34 to 8E-35.
So that's all I've got. I won't do anything for the Senate, but it looks as though I will be wrong about Coleman winning Minnesota (I can't believe that is still not settled. I don't feel bad about missing it, and to my credit I did predict that it would be the last race decided.)
Finally, I got the absolute percentages for Obama and McCain wrong - I said it would be 53.1-45.9; instead it was 52.9-45.7. But notice that I overshot both numbers (I just took the fact that Kerry and Bush added up to 99.0% and applied the same assumption to Obama and McCain). In terms of share of the 2-party vote, it broke down like this:
Prediction - 53.64 to 46.36
Actual - 53.68 to 46.32
Adding up the two errors, I missed the national vote share by less than one-tenth of one percentage point (0.08%). I'll take it.
I correctly predicted the outcome of 50 of the 51 states, missing Indiana.
| State | EV | Poll | Proj | Win | Δp | Δa | Error |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DC | 3 | 0.45 | 66.82 | 85.92 | 19.1 | ||
| VT | 3 | 1.17 | 28.13 | 37.01 | 8.9 | ||
| DE | 3 | 3.02 | 27.92 | 25.00 | -2.9 | ||
| NY | 31 | 4.38 | 27.74 | 26.69 | -1.1 | ||
| MD | 10 | 0.73 | 25.80 | 25.44 | -0.4 | ||
| HI | 4 | 0.66 | 22.64 | 45.26 | 22.6 | ||
| CA | 55 | 6.64 | 22.60 | 24.06 | 1.5 | ||
| IL | 21 | 4.14 | 22.15 | 25.13 | 3.0 | ||
| CT | 7 | 1.92 | 20.16 | 22.37 | 2.2 | ||
| RI | 4 | 0.76 | 19.83 | 27.92 | 8.1 | ||
| MA | 12 | 4.16 | 17.77 | 25.81 | 8.0 | ||
| OR | 7 | 9.62 | 15.74 | 16.35 | 0.6 | ||
| ME | 4 | 5.87 | 15.52 | 17.32 | 1.8 | ||
| WA | 11 | 7.03 | 15.36 | 17.18 | 1.8 | ||
| IA | 7 | 9.67 | 15.28 | 9.53 | -5.8 | ||
| NJ | 15 | 9.48 | 14.12 | 15.57 | 1.5 | ||
| MI | 17 | 9.43 | 13.89 | 16.47 | 2.6 | ||
| WI | 10 | 10.78 | 13.24 | 13.90 | 0.7 | ||
| MN | 10 | 13.62 | 9.91 | 10.24 | 0.3 | ||
| NH | 4 | 13.00 | 9.77 | 9.61 | -0.2 | ||
| NM | 5 | 7.14 | 9.49 | 15.13 | 5.6 | ||
| PA | 21 | 27.15 | 8.06 | 10.35 | 2.3 | ||
| CO | 9 | 14.57 | 6.42 | 8.95 | 2.5 | ||
| VA | 13 | 21.06 | 6.06 | 6.30 | 0.2 | ||
| NV | 5 | 13.12 | 5.79 | 12.49 | 6.7 | ||
| OH | 20 | 28.72 | 2.89 | 4.54 | 1.6 | ||
| FL | 27 | 29.05 | 2.03 | 2.82 | 0.8 | ||
| NC | 15 | 27.25 | 1.04 | 0.33 | -0.7 | ||
| MO | 11 | 24.40 | 0.23 | -0.13 | -0.4 | ||
| IN | 11 | 16.09 | -0.51 | 1.03 | 1.5 | ||
| ND | 3 | 2.67 | -2.67 | -8.63 | -6.0 | ||
| GA | 15 | 15.07 | -3.23 | -5.21 | -2.0 | ||
| AZ | 10 | 7.31 | -3.61 | -8.52 | -4.9 | ||
| MT | 3 | 5.28 | -4.29 | -2.26 | 2.0 | ||
| SC | 8 | 4.60 | -8.64 | -8.98 | -0.3 | ||
| SD | 3 | 2.88 | -9.13 | -8.41 | 0.7 | ||
| AR | 6 | 3.06 | -9.29 | -19.85 | -10.6 | ||
| MS | 6 | 3.53 | -9.43 | -13.17 | -3.7 | ||
| LA | 9 | 2.26 | -10.04 | -18.63 | -8.6 | ||
| WV | 5 | 6.24 | -10.60 | -13.12 | -2.5 | ||
| TX | 34 | 2.53 | -11.01 | -11.77 | -0.8 | ||
| TN | 11 | 2.31 | -12.60 | -15.07 | -2.5 | ||
| AK | 3 | 5.71 | -13.62 | -21.54 | -7.9 | ||
| KY | 8 | 8.52 | -14.04 | -16.23 | -2.2 | ||
| KS | 6 | 4.03 | -16.97 | -14.96 | 2.0 | ||
| NE | 5 | 0.78 | -19.05 | -14.93 | 4.1 | ||
| AL | 9 | 3.42 | -23.08 | -21.58 | 1.5 | ||
| ID | 4 | 0.71 | -23.49 | -25.43 | -1.9 | ||
| UT | 5 | 1.76 | -24.63 | -28.18 | -3.6 | ||
| WY | 3 | 3.38 | -26.34 | -32.24 | -5.9 | ||
| OK | 7 | 4.25 | -26.62 | -31.29 | -4.7 |
Unless otherwise noted, I am omitting DC and HI from my analysis. These states were not only significant leverage points as indicated by severe values of the Cook's D statistic, but also represented significant outliers based on their studentized residuals. Because of this and the dismal amount of polling in both states, I have omitted them. (This, by the way, is how statisticians say "these data really screwed up my model so I took 'em out.")
I missed statewise margin of victory by {3.1 average, 2.2 median}. I was closest to correctly guessing the outcome in New Hampshire (which is just dumb luck; that state was crazy!). I predicted 54.5-44.7; the outcome was 54.1-44.5, a net error of 0.16 points. I was farthest from correctly guessing the outcome in Arkansas (damn PUMAs!) - I predicted a 9.3 pt McCain victory; he won the state by 19.9 pts, an error of 10.56 points.
The regression model treated me nicely.
The first plot shows my prediction line (red) and where each state actually fell (blue).
The second plot shows my prediction (x-axis) with my prediction error (y-axis).
Highlighting +/- 4.00 was arbitrary.
My regression intercept has a p-value of 0.484, indicating there is absolutely no evidence that my average prediction varied significantly from the average actual outcome.
The model in total has a p-value of 0.000000000000000000000000000000000224, which besides being an awesomely small number, also indicates the probability of beating my model by chance alone.
On the down side, the regression model coefficient of 1.124 had a 95% CI of {1.057, 1.192}. Because 1.000 is not in this interval, this indictates that my model significantly underpredicted the average differential in each state (for either candidate; in other words, I gave Obama too much credit in red states and McCain too much credit in blue states, etc.).
Finally, my model scored an r-square value of 0.960. In other words, if each state's outcome was determined by the results of 100 coin flips, having my model in hand would be analogous to already knowing the outcome of 96 of the flips. Or to use another analogy, it would be like predicting the rankings of teams in baseball standings for a 162-game season while already knowing how the first 156 games turn out.
And just for curiosity's sake, I was joking about being unjustified in removing HI and DC. While it's true I missed them both by large margins (especially HI), it's clear in the picture below why DC (off to the right) is overly influential in determining the line of best fit. (HI is the point at 23, 45).
Had I included the two states, r-squared drops from 0.960 to 0.956 and significance actually decreases (that's good) from 2E-34 to 8E-35.
So that's all I've got. I won't do anything for the Senate, but it looks as though I will be wrong about Coleman winning Minnesota (I can't believe that is still not settled. I don't feel bad about missing it, and to my credit I did predict that it would be the last race decided.)
Finally, I got the absolute percentages for Obama and McCain wrong - I said it would be 53.1-45.9; instead it was 52.9-45.7. But notice that I overshot both numbers (I just took the fact that Kerry and Bush added up to 99.0% and applied the same assumption to Obama and McCain). In terms of share of the 2-party vote, it broke down like this:
Prediction - 53.64 to 46.36
Actual - 53.68 to 46.32
Adding up the two errors, I missed the national vote share by less than one-tenth of one percentage point (0.08%). I'll take it.
Champion of Swimming Games Ignored by SEC
Sorry for the terrible joke, but some dude named Markopolos has been trying to warn the SEC about some $50B fraud for like a decade.
Missouri Reddening?
Robin Carnahan has announced she will run for the Senate seat Kit Bond will be vacating in 2010. A victory would make her Missouri's second-most-attractive senator, behind Cruella Deville.
Missouri is reddening faster than almost any other state. WTF is going on here? In 2004 the Democratic governor was so weak he couldn't even win the primary, ousted by Claire McCaskill. McCaskill, though, still couldn't win the general election.
Two years later Missouri elected McCaskill to the Senate, and two years after that they put a Democrat back in the governor's mansion. With Nate Silver ranking Missouri as the senate seat most likely to flip in 2010, the state could go from 2 Republican senators and a Republican governor just before the 2006 election to having all those seats filled by Democrats after the 2010 election.
That said, President Obama should not focus too much energy on Missouri in his 2012 reelection campaign.
Missouri is reddening faster than almost any other state. WTF is going on here? In 2004 the Democratic governor was so weak he couldn't even win the primary, ousted by Claire McCaskill. McCaskill, though, still couldn't win the general election.
Two years later Missouri elected McCaskill to the Senate, and two years after that they put a Democrat back in the governor's mansion. With Nate Silver ranking Missouri as the senate seat most likely to flip in 2010, the state could go from 2 Republican senators and a Republican governor just before the 2006 election to having all those seats filled by Democrats after the 2010 election.
That said, President Obama should not focus too much energy on Missouri in his 2012 reelection campaign.
Woman deems absurdly large breasts "not racist enough"
OK, so that's not true, but you've got to read this article.
February 02, 2009
Conservapedia Nuance
It's clear "the trustworthy encyclopedia" is raising the level of debate when it comes to Commerce Secretary-nominee Judd Gregg.
There's no link to this directly but for a few days it should be on the main page: of the Republican whose departure from the Senate could give the Democrats the overblown total of 60 senators, the encyclopedia asks: "Benedict Arnold or Judas?"
(Actually, they had an extra comma in the question. Also, this is one of the few instances when I do agree with the standard rule on quotation mark/punctuation mark ordering)
There's no link to this directly but for a few days it should be on the main page: of the Republican whose departure from the Senate could give the Democrats the overblown total of 60 senators, the encyclopedia asks: "Benedict Arnold or Judas?"
(Actually, they had an extra comma in the question. Also, this is one of the few instances when I do agree with the standard rule on quotation mark/punctuation mark ordering)
Fish and Fishes
I recently found myself in yet another debate over the usage of "fish" vs. "fishes" and other similar issues.
Unless I'm mistaken, I'm rather sure that "fish" just refers to more than one fish whereas "fishes" refers to more than one type of fish.
Anyway, I figure that sort of thing has to have a name but I couldn't find one. Anybody got any ideas? In the process I came across interesting words Ichthyology and Isogloss.
Final thought: does the same rule apply to "persons" and "people"?
Unless I'm mistaken, I'm rather sure that "fish" just refers to more than one fish whereas "fishes" refers to more than one type of fish.
Anyway, I figure that sort of thing has to have a name but I couldn't find one. Anybody got any ideas? In the process I came across interesting words Ichthyology and Isogloss.
Final thought: does the same rule apply to "persons" and "people"?
Punxsutawney Phil: Groundhog Data
How reliable are Phil's predictions?
After a too-long internet search, the best historical weather data I was able to find (I'm happy to do something else if you can find better data) was monthly average temperatures for Portland, OR from 1941 on. Since Phil predicts "early spring" or "six more weeks of winter," I gave February a weight of 4 and March a weight of 2 (number of weeks of those six weeks) and took the average. Not the best method of course, but the best I have available. There were no predictions for 1941 and 1942 and no weather data for 2007 and 2008, so I had 63 data points.
Phil predicts more winter:
Number of times - 53
Mean temperature - 44.38
Variance - 4.94
Phil predicts early spring:
Number of times - 10
Mean temperature - 44.96
Variance - 4.90
Two-sample t-test:
T-statistic: -0.760 with 61 degrees of freedom
One-sided p-value: 0.225
***************************************************
Translation: We say these results are so extreme they would "only" happen one in four times by chance. Which isn't sufficient evidence to claim that there's any relationship between Groundhog's Day predictions and actual outcomes.
Sorry to eat away at your childhood :)
After a too-long internet search, the best historical weather data I was able to find (I'm happy to do something else if you can find better data) was monthly average temperatures for Portland, OR from 1941 on. Since Phil predicts "early spring" or "six more weeks of winter," I gave February a weight of 4 and March a weight of 2 (number of weeks of those six weeks) and took the average. Not the best method of course, but the best I have available. There were no predictions for 1941 and 1942 and no weather data for 2007 and 2008, so I had 63 data points.
Phil predicts more winter:
Number of times - 53
Mean temperature - 44.38
Variance - 4.94
Phil predicts early spring:
Number of times - 10
Mean temperature - 44.96
Variance - 4.90
Two-sample t-test:
T-statistic: -0.760 with 61 degrees of freedom
One-sided p-value: 0.225
***************************************************
Translation: We say these results are so extreme they would "only" happen one in four times by chance. Which isn't sufficient evidence to claim that there's any relationship between Groundhog's Day predictions and actual outcomes.
Sorry to eat away at your childhood :)
Obama Thus Far: 1.5 Thumbs Up
I would call this a sufficiently good summary of Obama's first 10 or so days.
Super Bowl Ads
Remarkably well done site given that some of the content is less than 12 hours old.
PS - The whole time I watched the ad for the new "Fast and the Furious" movie, I kept waiting for a tagline along the lines of "It's faster. It's furiouser." They let me down.
PS - The whole time I watched the ad for the new "Fast and the Furious" movie, I kept waiting for a tagline along the lines of "It's faster. It's furiouser." They let me down.
February 01, 2009
January 31, 2009
Cheech & Chong: The "Felimoy" Tour
Ok, so I don't know if you guys will care about this at all, but I'm posting this article because I totally, un-ironically, love Cheech and Chong. Especially Chong.
“And I’m deaf,” Mr. Chong added.
“And I’m deaf,” Mr. Chong added.
Waxing eloquent, Mr. Chong began comparing himself and Mr. Marin to wolves.
(“This is going to be a long one,” Mr. Marin said with a shrug. “Sorry.”)January 30, 2009
A daily dose of crazy
Straight from the Roman Catholic Church and their un-excommunicated Bishop Williamson.
January 29, 2009
The computer future
Chris' technology problems (as described in the "I like watching news as it happens" post) actually led me to an interesting question: will the average person of our generation ever choose to buy a desktop again?
As far as I can determine desktops offer no significant advantage to the vast majority of what I'll call our generation (loosely defining "our generation" to mean anyone who remembers the Internet explosion but who is too young to remember the introduction of Atari). Competitive hard drives, video cards, optical disc drives, memory sticks, and ethernet connections already exist for laptops. And as solid-state drives (a.k.a. big flash drives) become more competitive the price of hard-disk drives should fall even further than it has already.
Granted there exists a small, and possibly growing (?), population of users interested in high-end functionality (e.g. memory-intensive gaming, video editing, audio recording, etc.). These people will always desire the newest technology (as a technological difference in something like video editing capabilities can create wildly different end products), which is usually pretty bulky and cannot be fit immediately into a laptop, so they will usually require a desktop. Basically those in industries that pioneer the usage of new technologies will be chained to desktops, but I cannot imagine a situation in which a laptop with a docking station (including a full-size keyboard, mouse, and monitor) would be insufficient for a typical young computer user.
To take this argument one step further: I imagine that over time cheap, streamlined laptops (e.g. netbooks) with only a handful of features (e.g. web-browsing and text editing) will gain a huge foothold in the US market for computers (I don't have enough experience or knowledge to speculate outside my home country).
In my efforts to prove that I will someday be correct I ended up checking out Amazon's "most popular items in Laptop Computers." When I checked the list (updated hourly) thirteen of the top twenty-five most popular items were netbooks. The top four items are netbooks, and only one laptop was able to crack the top ten. Apparently netbooks, "[...] now account for 7 percent of all portable PCs [...]," a proportion much higher than I thought it would be.
As far as I can determine desktops offer no significant advantage to the vast majority of what I'll call our generation (loosely defining "our generation" to mean anyone who remembers the Internet explosion but who is too young to remember the introduction of Atari). Competitive hard drives, video cards, optical disc drives, memory sticks, and ethernet connections already exist for laptops. And as solid-state drives (a.k.a. big flash drives) become more competitive the price of hard-disk drives should fall even further than it has already.
Granted there exists a small, and possibly growing (?), population of users interested in high-end functionality (e.g. memory-intensive gaming, video editing, audio recording, etc.). These people will always desire the newest technology (as a technological difference in something like video editing capabilities can create wildly different end products), which is usually pretty bulky and cannot be fit immediately into a laptop, so they will usually require a desktop. Basically those in industries that pioneer the usage of new technologies will be chained to desktops, but I cannot imagine a situation in which a laptop with a docking station (including a full-size keyboard, mouse, and monitor) would be insufficient for a typical young computer user.
To take this argument one step further: I imagine that over time cheap, streamlined laptops (e.g. netbooks) with only a handful of features (e.g. web-browsing and text editing) will gain a huge foothold in the US market for computers (I don't have enough experience or knowledge to speculate outside my home country).
In my efforts to prove that I will someday be correct I ended up checking out Amazon's "most popular items in Laptop Computers." When I checked the list (updated hourly) thirteen of the top twenty-five most popular items were netbooks. The top four items are netbooks, and only one laptop was able to crack the top ten. Apparently netbooks, "[...] now account for 7 percent of all portable PCs [...]," a proportion much higher than I thought it would be.
Two Thoughts on the Economy
1. For reasons unknown, I have begun to read Rush Limbaugh's stimulus proposal. I haven't gotten far, but in the beginning he sets up a sharp contrast between the "Keynesian" (i.e., Democratic) solution of funding "shovel-ready" projects and the "supply-side" (Republican) solution of tax cuts.
My knowledge of economics puts me in a better place to discuss the Republicans' proposal than the Democrats'. Tax cuts will stimulate the economy to some degree - the more progressive the tax cut, the more short-term relief is brought about. This is because poor people spend the highest percentage of their income, while wealthier people tend to save/invest it. So tax cuts to middle- and upper- class folks will largely be saved, or used to pay down individuals' debts.
So my question is - assuming (and I think I can do so safely) that the average American currently has ballooning debt, is it possible that the tax cut route might actually be better, in that private debts (mortgages, credit cards) could represent a coming crisis that needs to be averted now? Just a thought.
(And I should add, it's entirely possibly that such a proposal wouldn't actually result in Americans making a net payment on their debt, or at least the right Americans paying down the right debts.)
************************************************************
2. This second thought it much more political than economic, but it's something to watch for: the Republicans need to carve out a voice ASAP if they want a shot at the 2010 elections. So they're going to have to find ways to oppose the Democrats. Thus far, they haven't had a lot of luck.
But with the economy being the number one issue, here's an argument you're going to hear more and more as election day comes ...
Let's say you're God. Let's say unemployment is currently 8%. Let's say without action, it will be 14%, with the Republicans' stimulus it will be 12%, and with Obama's stimulus it will be 10%.
So the Democrats say, "Wow, look at that, we saved a whole lot of jobs!"
So the Republicans say, "Wow, look at that, they didn't create any jobs. In fact, they lost jobs!"
I guess it would have been a whole lot easier for me to say "There's going to be an upcoming argument about jobs saved vs. jobs created." Oh well, you get the point.
My knowledge of economics puts me in a better place to discuss the Republicans' proposal than the Democrats'. Tax cuts will stimulate the economy to some degree - the more progressive the tax cut, the more short-term relief is brought about. This is because poor people spend the highest percentage of their income, while wealthier people tend to save/invest it. So tax cuts to middle- and upper- class folks will largely be saved, or used to pay down individuals' debts.
So my question is - assuming (and I think I can do so safely) that the average American currently has ballooning debt, is it possible that the tax cut route might actually be better, in that private debts (mortgages, credit cards) could represent a coming crisis that needs to be averted now? Just a thought.
(And I should add, it's entirely possibly that such a proposal wouldn't actually result in Americans making a net payment on their debt, or at least the right Americans paying down the right debts.)
************************************************************
2. This second thought it much more political than economic, but it's something to watch for: the Republicans need to carve out a voice ASAP if they want a shot at the 2010 elections. So they're going to have to find ways to oppose the Democrats. Thus far, they haven't had a lot of luck.
But with the economy being the number one issue, here's an argument you're going to hear more and more as election day comes ...
Let's say you're God. Let's say unemployment is currently 8%. Let's say without action, it will be 14%, with the Republicans' stimulus it will be 12%, and with Obama's stimulus it will be 10%.
So the Democrats say, "Wow, look at that, we saved a whole lot of jobs!"
So the Republicans say, "Wow, look at that, they didn't create any jobs. In fact, they lost jobs!"
I guess it would have been a whole lot easier for me to say "There's going to be an upcoming argument about jobs saved vs. jobs created." Oh well, you get the point.
I like watching news as it's happening
I had the pleasure of watching this last night. My first thought was "hey, that's gonna be news tomorrow." (Skip ahead to about 9:00)
There was also an interesting segment on Morning Joe this morning, but the clip is not up yet.
There was also an interesting segment on Morning Joe this morning, but the clip is not up yet.
January 28, 2009
Update
I have no witty comments or editorials on this article, but I thought it would be worth posting for those of you who have not seen this news/discussion about the USPS and service cuts.
[As I was attempting to choose the labels for this post, I didn't know whether to put recession or depression. Yesterday, a colleague of mine facetiously pointed out that people with jobs tend to call it a recession, those without, a depression. So, it's a recession for me.]
[As I was attempting to choose the labels for this post, I didn't know whether to put recession or depression. Yesterday, a colleague of mine facetiously pointed out that people with jobs tend to call it a recession, those without, a depression. So, it's a recession for me.]
Big Numbers
Inspired by one of Bart's links, I put the site's list of big numbers into an Excel form and then made an image out of it (Google Docs wouldn't display the really big ones the way I wanted).
To make the most sense of a number's name, take the exponent, divide it by three, and subtract one.
So Nonillion, or 10^30, comes from [(30/3)-1]=9, and is equal to one thousand plus 9 triplets of zeroes. Sexvigintillion, besides being the dirtiest sounding number in existence, 10^81, or one thousand plus 26 triplets of zeroes ("sex" meaning six and "vigint" meaning twenty?)
Finally, just in case you didn't know this, note that 10^100 (the only exponent on the list besides 1 and 2 that isn't divisible by 3) is called a "googol." And no, it doesn't seem that dictionaries are yet taking the spelling "google," an issue which arose in a game of Boggle I played with Desiree.
To make the most sense of a number's name, take the exponent, divide it by three, and subtract one.
So Nonillion, or 10^30, comes from [(30/3)-1]=9, and is equal to one thousand plus 9 triplets of zeroes. Sexvigintillion, besides being the dirtiest sounding number in existence, 10^81, or one thousand plus 26 triplets of zeroes ("sex" meaning six and "vigint" meaning twenty?)
Finally, just in case you didn't know this, note that 10^100 (the only exponent on the list besides 1 and 2 that isn't divisible by 3) is called a "googol." And no, it doesn't seem that dictionaries are yet taking the spelling "google," an issue which arose in a game of Boggle I played with Desiree.
Bacon Explosion
I'm not sure what to say about this. Good use of internet marketing? Congratulations, enjoy your heart attack?
WTF?
From a political perspective, why would a guy whose middle name is Hussein and has (in some ways) an image problem at home give his first presidential interview to a network whose name sounds no different than that of a terrorist organization to most Americans?
Here's an article I haven't yet read.
Update: Okay, I read the article. Seems this interview with a network that is a voice of moderation in the Middle East will serve our nation's actual interest at the cost of its petty obsessions.
I'm sorry I doubted you, O Great One.
Here's an article I haven't yet read.
Update: Okay, I read the article. Seems this interview with a network that is a voice of moderation in the Middle East will serve our nation's actual interest at the cost of its petty obsessions.
I'm sorry I doubted you, O Great One.
Rewriting history as it happens
I really disagree with this practice by the Wall Street Journal. Basically the WSJ is changing stories without noting when and how it has done so. Imagine that on January 20 I sent you a link to an article in which I really liked the opening line of "Rod Blagojevich re-declares his innocence on the Today Show." Well, if that is a WSJ article then when you check it out a few days later the story very well may not contain that line, may be significantly different in other ways (paragraphs completely removed, quotes missing, etc.), and may even have a different publishing date.
While I understand the importance of accuracy in a digital newspaper, I also think the the Portfolio author above is correct when he argues:
While I understand the importance of accuracy in a digital newspaper, I also think the the Portfolio author above is correct when he argues:
The WSJ is one of the key newspapers of record when it comes to this financial crisis, and increasingly it's being read online rather than on paper. In fact, much of the WSJ's online content never appears on paper at all, which means that the web is the only place to find it. It's therefore incumbent on the WSJ to preserve those web pages. If it doesn't, it's essentially erasing not only its own history, but also that of the financial crisis.
January 27, 2009
Promise for the Future...
We all have our issues. I mean, the issues floating around society that we are more interested in than the average person.
This is one of mine.
This is one of mine.
500th Post!
Somebody Think A Little has made it to the 500th post. I don't know about everyone else, but I am really happy with the progress of the blog so far.
On another positive note, as of yesterday Obama has his full cabinet.
On another positive note, as of yesterday Obama has his full cabinet.
Link Dump - Bart's Bookmarks
I figure that while no one else is posting anything I may as well bombard the blog. To that end I just sorted through all of my bookmarks (except my StumbleUpon bookmarks) and pulled out a list of ones that I think others may use and/or enjoy. They are loosely sorted. Good luck getting through them all. (To clarify in advance: some sections are labeled "Sites" while others are labeled "Specific." "Sites" implies that the links will be to complete websites that fit the category; "specific" implies the links lead to specific pages of websites. For example, Badass of the Week goes into the "Sites" section while a badass I particularly liked would go under "specific.")
Blogs - Funny:
Funny Art Sites:
Blogs - Funny:
- Photoshop Disasters
- Steve Don’t Eat It!
- A man eats terrible things and describes them! - Meme Pool
- Brokers With Their Hands on Their Faces
- I Am Neurotic.
- Fistpumps.com
- Strange Maps
Funny Art Sites:
- Brandon Bird’s Brandon Bird-O-Rama!
- Garfield Minus Garfield
- Kate Beaton
- The Nietzsche Family Circus
- Eric Joyner - A man who paints lots of robots and donuts.
- 270 to Win
- Badass of the Week
- Cracked
- Fan Fiction Net
- Gapminder
- Kermit Bale
- McSweeney’s Internet Tendency: One More Handful of Letters From Thanks and Have Fun Running the Country: Kids’ Letters to President Obama.
- Perot Charts
- PolitiFact Truth-O-Meter
- Porn for the Blind
- Science Debate 2008
- Technology, Entertainment, Design (TED)
- Pundit Kitchen
- NumberSpiral.com
- Amnesty International poster
- Octomatics
- Tempo over time
- The Hundred Greatest Theorems
- Inaugural Words - 1789 to the Present - Interactive Graphic - NYTimes.com
- The Ebb and Flow of Movies - Box Office Receipts 1986 — 2008 - Interactive Graphic - NYTimes.com
- Poodwaddle World Clock
- Science Debate 2008: Obama and McCain answers
- Age, Turnout and Votes
- The MegaPenny Project
- Movie-A-Minute summaries
- The Anti-Gym
- Conan O’Brien’s Harvard Commencement Speech
- Pterodactyl porn
- A Concise History Of Black-White Relations In The United States
- If they IM’d: Obama’s VP Prospects
- GovTrack: H. Res. 847: Text of Legislation
- McSweeney’s Internet Tendency: Midlife-Crisis Bible Stories.
- My Year of Flops
- Peter’s Evil Overlord List
- Creepy Japanese Mario Fan Art
- Disappearing Car Doors
- Why Can’t I Own a Canadian?
- Fiscal conservative comic
- Reverse September 11
- Jesus vs. Bush 43
- Fuck the Earth Day
- Gauss facts thus far
- Obama’s Short List for VP Leaked to Press
- McCain’s Short List for VP Leaked to Press
- Victoria From “The Maury Show” Had Her Baby
- Big Dick’s Halfway Inn: Home of the Original Minnow Shot
- SNL: Census Taker with Christopher Walken
- SNL: Word Association with Richard Pryor
- Flush Bush: A funny look at Bush’s approval ratings over time
- Hannidate
- Sleeping animal live feed
- Italians vs. Europeans
- Bush Approval Ratings
- Did McCain Lift His Russia-Georgia Speech from Wikipedia?
- Geography game
- Study Bulb
- String Spin Toy
- Statetris (Tetris with states)
- Fake or Not (NSFW)
- Geosense
- Dice Wars - WiiPlayable
- World of Solitaire
- The eyeballing game
- Every Video Game
- Bush Shoe Game
- Wii Playable
- Puzzles.COM
- Random.org
- USAspending.gov
- Equation Sheet
- NationMaster
- StateMaster
- Kaiser State Health Facts
- NYC Subway Flash Overlay for Google Maps
- Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States
- Powerful Mp3 Music Search
- SendSpace
- YouSendIt
- MediaFire
- Google Maps
- HopStop
- NYC bridges on bikes
- Current Codes
- Get Human
- Torrent Pond
- NYC movie listings
- EasyBib
- Movavi Online Video Converter
- All UC
- IMDB
- Lostpedia
- VOTE411.org
- Gmaps Pedometer
- MediaCoder
- Bit.ly link shortener
A few quick links.
Let's get the blogging week started with a few interesting pages to check out:
- Nate Silver's writeup of "So Just Who Did Vote For The Bailout?" - A lot of interesting stuff in this one, including a statistical analysis of factors contributing to voting patterns on the first bailout bill last year and a brief discussion of the implications of writing one's own definitions of terms like Progressive.
- The Daily Beast - "The Best of Blago" - He is not only crazy; he has the ability to take legitimate literary quotations and warp them to suit his purposes. Wonderful spin, Rod.
- Bit.ly - An alternative to the Tiny URL service, Bit.ly has all of the same features, but is also copying (in their entirety), cataloging, and organizing all sites that users create shortened URLs for. It will take a while or the benefits to pan out (beyond the link-shortening, that is), but it should be interesting to see what researchers can pull off with that amount of information.
- Red Bull Snowscrapers - On February 5 a bunch of professional snowboarders will be jumping off a 90' ramp built in East River Park. Carly and I drove past this last week and saw the main ramp being built. The ramp is pretty cool, with the main support being provided by stacked shipping containers (see photo below). I kind of want to figure out a way to see this from afar so I don't have to hang out with a bunch of snowboarders to see one person jump this. Check out this site for more pictures of the actual ramps.
- Update: I also meant to include the fact that Texas dealt a blow to creationism in a recent schoolboard ruling.
January 25, 2009
Anyone looking for a new hobby?
A few nights ago Carly, Katie, and I had a group Wiki-diving session that ended up using up about forty-five minutes of our time and required three different types of searches (Wikipedia, YouTube, and Google Products). I’ll introduce the topic here the same way in which we learned about it: a video of some guy in a park playing with a clear ball.
The Wiki-diving actually began as an argument about whether the guy in the video was holding a real ball or a digitally created image of a ball that was added at a later time. This led us, naturally, to Wikipedia, where we found out that, “Contact juggling is a form of object manipulation that focuses on the movement of objects such as balls in permanent contact with the body. Having little in common with ‘toss’ juggling, it most typically involves the rolling of one or more completely transparent balls on the hands and arms to create visual illusions, such as that of a ball fixed in space” (Contact juggling). Who knew?
A few related links that we enjoyed:
Since we watched nearly all of Moschen’s very strange TED talk Katie determined that the three of us are TED addicts and may need professional help.
The Wiki-diving actually began as an argument about whether the guy in the video was holding a real ball or a digitally created image of a ball that was added at a later time. This led us, naturally, to Wikipedia, where we found out that, “Contact juggling is a form of object manipulation that focuses on the movement of objects such as balls in permanent contact with the body. Having little in common with ‘toss’ juggling, it most typically involves the rolling of one or more completely transparent balls on the hands and arms to create visual illusions, such as that of a ball fixed in space” (Contact juggling). Who knew?
A few related links that we enjoyed:
- Contact juggling balls for sale (it turns out that this is a fairly cheap hobby);
- Michael Moschen, the founder of the activity;
- Michael Moschen’s TED talk;
- ”Contact Juggling: Day 114”.
Since we watched nearly all of Moschen’s very strange TED talk Katie determined that the three of us are TED addicts and may need professional help.
January 24, 2009
Gillibrand
Thoughts?
I don't really know anything about her (I have a new goal to become a little more informed about NY politics), but she seems qualified - which is more than I could say about Caroline K - and this article endears me to her a bit - the partisan flexibility, the "Sunshine Report," etc. Do you guys know more about her?
I don't really know anything about her (I have a new goal to become a little more informed about NY politics), but she seems qualified - which is more than I could say about Caroline K - and this article endears me to her a bit - the partisan flexibility, the "Sunshine Report," etc. Do you guys know more about her?
January 23, 2009
Arrested Development Movie
Maybe I'm jumping to conclusions, but this interview gets me close to nail-in-the-coffin status on giving up on Michael Cera. (The word "d-bag" comes to mind ...)
January 22, 2009
A few things (Updated Twice)
(Update: I was going to say that I never thought Caroline had much of a chance. And using your uncle's collapse to find a way out is not just total BS, it's horrible.)
Random thoughts and rants.
Should Tim Geithner's tax issues be a bigger deal? I hear more about that than if he's really the best guy to be in the position. For what it's worth, I heard O'Reilly belligerently defending Geithner against a conservative caller yesterday.
***************************************
Obama's speech was not that bad. Everybody's ripping on it. Not everybody, but many people. I thought the speech was very good. Expecting it to be epic is like expecting Babe Ruth to hit three homeruns just because you're at the game. People, he can't give one of the greatest 20 speeches in American history every time he opens his mouth.
Besides, I actually took a copy of the speech and read it line for line, trying to choose the ones that might be "remembered" in history. In so doing, it became quite clear that there's no way to know, because it all depends on what happens in the future. It needs to sound prophetic. If the energy crisis somehow got much worse, and he got us out of it, the line about "harnessing the wind, sun, and soil" could very well be the hallmark of a 21st century presidency. Or not. It all depends, and the whole speech is like that. But I thought that the tone was appropriate, and that the style achieved the sort of timelessness you're looking for in an inaugural address (i.e., except for a few specifics, it basically could have been given by any president).
******************************************************
As was the case with the Golden Globes, Heath Ledger is nominated for an Academy Award for Best Supporting Actor. Maybe I'm delusional here, but whether you want him to win or not, I would have thought he'd be in the best lead actor category. He's got to have pretty similar screentime to Batman I'd think, and his performance certainly leads the movie. A pretty minor controversy, to be sure, but just a thought I'd had.
Also, I think it was underreported that Kate Winslet won Best Lead and Best Supporting at the Golden Globes. Then again, it is the Golden Globes.
(Update2: An interesting coincidence is that the nominations for the Oscars were announced today, on what I just read is the one-year anniversary of Ledger's death.)
********************************************************
This whole re-oath thing is pretty stupid, but dammit Barack, why didn't you use a Bible the second time? Just save us the grief! On a related note, Konservapedia is still sure he's Muslim. ("He took the oath on a Bible and not a Koran? Well that's what a secret Muslim would do.")
*******************************************************
I knew I had something else but I can't remember it so I'll do this instead.
Starting with 2008 GDP of $13.84 trillion and debt of $10.6 trillion, and assuming long-term growth of 2% and inflation of 1%, and also assuming the CBO estimate for debt as a percentage of GDP, then in 80 years the nominal GDP will be $150 trillion and the nominal debt will be $1 quadrillion.
Random thoughts and rants.
Should Tim Geithner's tax issues be a bigger deal? I hear more about that than if he's really the best guy to be in the position. For what it's worth, I heard O'Reilly belligerently defending Geithner against a conservative caller yesterday.
***************************************
Obama's speech was not that bad. Everybody's ripping on it. Not everybody, but many people. I thought the speech was very good. Expecting it to be epic is like expecting Babe Ruth to hit three homeruns just because you're at the game. People, he can't give one of the greatest 20 speeches in American history every time he opens his mouth.
Besides, I actually took a copy of the speech and read it line for line, trying to choose the ones that might be "remembered" in history. In so doing, it became quite clear that there's no way to know, because it all depends on what happens in the future. It needs to sound prophetic. If the energy crisis somehow got much worse, and he got us out of it, the line about "harnessing the wind, sun, and soil" could very well be the hallmark of a 21st century presidency. Or not. It all depends, and the whole speech is like that. But I thought that the tone was appropriate, and that the style achieved the sort of timelessness you're looking for in an inaugural address (i.e., except for a few specifics, it basically could have been given by any president).
******************************************************
As was the case with the Golden Globes, Heath Ledger is nominated for an Academy Award for Best Supporting Actor. Maybe I'm delusional here, but whether you want him to win or not, I would have thought he'd be in the best lead actor category. He's got to have pretty similar screentime to Batman I'd think, and his performance certainly leads the movie. A pretty minor controversy, to be sure, but just a thought I'd had.
Also, I think it was underreported that Kate Winslet won Best Lead and Best Supporting at the Golden Globes. Then again, it is the Golden Globes.
(Update2: An interesting coincidence is that the nominations for the Oscars were announced today, on what I just read is the one-year anniversary of Ledger's death.)
********************************************************
This whole re-oath thing is pretty stupid, but dammit Barack, why didn't you use a Bible the second time? Just save us the grief! On a related note, Konservapedia is still sure he's Muslim. ("He took the oath on a Bible and not a Koran? Well that's what a secret Muslim would do.")
*******************************************************
I knew I had something else but I can't remember it so I'll do this instead.
Starting with 2008 GDP of $13.84 trillion and debt of $10.6 trillion, and assuming long-term growth of 2% and inflation of 1%, and also assuming the CBO estimate for debt as a percentage of GDP, then in 80 years the nominal GDP will be $150 trillion and the nominal debt will be $1 quadrillion.
January 21, 2009
Toyota makes a run
It appears that Toyota will end GM's 77-year run at the top of the auto-sales heap. I wonder how much of this has to do with the crisis and how much has to do with policies within the companies (e.g. Toyota's development of the Prius).
It's not that easy being green...
Environmental Working Group just released a report on the efficiency and green-ness of CFL light bulbs. As it turns out many CFLs are not as great as the companies producing them may argue. Skipping the boring stuff, here is EWG's list of the seven best CFLs. There are also some tips for cleaning up broken CFLs, which contain mercury and are therefore poisonous.
God help us
We're in deeper shit than I thought.
Getting dressed this morning, I saw a financial expert on FOX News(!) who was saying that:
1. Obama's stimulus needed to be at least $900 billion.
2. The $700 billion TARP needed to be expanded to at least $1 trillion.
3. The government needs to nationalize the banks much more quickly than they are.
Oh dear god, help us now.
Getting dressed this morning, I saw a financial expert on FOX News(!) who was saying that:
1. Obama's stimulus needed to be at least $900 billion.
2. The $700 billion TARP needed to be expanded to at least $1 trillion.
3. The government needs to nationalize the banks much more quickly than they are.
Oh dear god, help us now.
Why I Love President Obama, Part 1
http://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing_room/executive_orders/
PS - Don't make a big deal of it, but if you find somewhere where Bush's whitehouse.gov still exists, let me know.
PS - Don't make a big deal of it, but if you find somewhere where Bush's whitehouse.gov still exists, let me know.
Hurricane Katrina
Check out what some bitter left-wing fringe website is writing today:
President Obama will keep the broken promises made by President Bush to rebuild New Orleans and the Gulf Coast. He and Vice President Biden will take steps to ensure that the federal government will never again allow such catastrophic failures in emergency planning and response to occur.
President Obama swiftly responded to Hurricane Katrina. Citing the Bush Administration's "unconscionable ineptitude" in responding to Hurricane Katrina, then-Senator Obama introduced legislation requiring disaster planners to take into account the specific needs of low-income hurricane victims. Obama visited thousands of Hurricane survivors in the Houston Convention Center and later took three more trips to the region. He worked with members of the Congressional Black Caucus to introduce legislation to address the immediate income, employment, business, and housing needs of Gulf Coast communities.
President Barack Obama will partner with the people of the Gulf Coast to rebuild now, stronger than ever.
Wow. In this new era of postpartisanship (whatever that means) who would be so eager to remain so bitter at the Bush adminstration? These guys.
Botched Oath
The guy at Electoral-Vote was way more upset about yesterday's botched oath than what I've read in any other account. Reading this is sorta funny.
Hadn't watched Biden's inauguration before (botched video in the conference room). Man, he took that oath strong. Every phrase seemed to implicitly say "I can't wait to kick your ass after this oath, Justice Stevens."
Also, what the hell is this controversy over Barack Obama's middle name? Really? You're more worried about someone whose name means he's a terrorist than someone whose name means he's a pansy? Because I've got to say, "Robinette" is not an impressive middle name.
Hadn't watched Biden's inauguration before (botched video in the conference room). Man, he took that oath strong. Every phrase seemed to implicitly say "I can't wait to kick your ass after this oath, Justice Stevens."
Also, what the hell is this controversy over Barack Obama's middle name? Really? You're more worried about someone whose name means he's a terrorist than someone whose name means he's a pansy? Because I've got to say, "Robinette" is not an impressive middle name.
My sister's parade pictures
Opinions on Barack's Speech
I would like to see the speech again before giving my review, but I really enjoyed reading some of the Daily Beast correspondents' reactions to Barack's inaugural address.
Obama's first act as president
In his first official act as president Barack Obama issued the following statement declaring a national day of reconciliation (My source was the White House blog):
NATIONAL DAY OF RENEWAL AND RECONCILIATION, 2009
- - - - - - -
BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
A PROCLAMATION
As I take the sacred oath of the highest office in the land, I am humbled by the responsibility placed upon my shoulders, renewed by the courage and decency of the American people, and fortified by my faith in an awesome God.
We are in the midst of a season of trial. Our Nation is being tested, and our people know great uncertainty. Yet the story of America is one of renewal in the face of adversity, reconciliation in a time of discord, and we know that there is a purpose for everything under heaven.
On this Inauguration Day, we are reminded that we are heirs to over two centuries of American democracy, and that this legacy is not simply a birthright -- it is a glorious burden. Now it falls to us to come together as a people to carry it forward once more.
So in the words of President Abraham Lincoln, let us remember that: "The mystic chords of memory, stretching from every battlefield and patriot grave to every living heart and hearthstone all over this broad land, will yet swell the chorus of the Union, when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature."
NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim January 20, 2009, a National Day of Renewal and Reconciliation, and call upon all of our citizens to serve one another and the common purpose of remaking this Nation for our new century.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this twentieth day of January, in the year of our Lord two thousand nine, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-third.
January 20, 2009
Inaugural Address, NYT Style
NYT broke down each inaugural address by instances of each word. (As I checked the link, they already beat me to this!). Well, anyway, since I did it, here's what I got:
| Nation | 12 |
| New | 11 |
| America | 7 |
| Less | 7 |
| People | 7 |
| Today | 7 |
| Cannot | 6 |
| Common | 6 |
| Let | 6 |
| Now | 6 |
| Time | 6 |
| Work | 6 |
| World | 6 |
| Day | 5 |
| Generation | 5 |
| Know | 5 |
| More | 5 |
| Spirit | 5 |
| Crisis | 4 |
| End | 4 |
| Greater | 4 |
| Long | 4 |
| Meet | 4 |
| Men | 4 |
| Peace | 4 |
| Power | 4 |
| Seek | 4 |
| Things | 4 |
| Women | 4 |
| Words | 4 |
| Americans | 3 |
| Carried | 3 |
| Courage | 3 |
| Earth | 3 |
| Economy | 3 |
| Father | 3 |
| Force | 3 |
| Freedom | 3 |
| Future | 3 |
| Generations | 3 |
| Government | 3 |
| Hard | 3 |
| History | 3 |
| Hope | 3 |
| Ideals | 3 |
| Jobs | 3 |
| Journey | 3 |
| Just | 3 |
| Last | 3 |
| Life | 3 |
| Man | 3 |
| Many | 3 |
| May | 3 |
| Moment | 3 |
| Most | 3 |
| Nations | 3 |
| Oath | 3 |
| Old | 3 |
| Once | 3 |
| Ourselves | 3 |
| Prosperity | 3 |
| Question | 3 |
| Rather | 3 |
Katie's lame inauguration liveblog
I'm alone in my apartment, so I just really wanted to share my thoughts as I watch, like...
*when Bush entered, the crowd started booing and singing "nah nah nah, hey hey hey, good bye" (i don't know what that song is actually called) and the band furiously and unsuccessfully tried to drown them out. pretty funny.
*aretha franklin's hat is amazing (photo tk)
*watching msnbc is not worth it, because as much as i like to hear rachel maddow's take, she's totally overpowered by chris matthews saying things like, "msnbc is the network of the future."
*how many people do you think are on the mall? pretty amazing
that's all for now...
UPDATE:
*Barack Obama is President!
*Great speech, I thought. Hopefully makes up for the fact that he kind of flubbed the oath of office.
*Bush 41's outfit is pretty outrageous (giant fur hat, bright purple scarf). I guess he's showing his true colors as a fashion maven in his old age?
*when Bush entered, the crowd started booing and singing "nah nah nah, hey hey hey, good bye" (i don't know what that song is actually called) and the band furiously and unsuccessfully tried to drown them out. pretty funny.
*aretha franklin's hat is amazing (photo tk)
*watching msnbc is not worth it, because as much as i like to hear rachel maddow's take, she's totally overpowered by chris matthews saying things like, "msnbc is the network of the future."
*how many people do you think are on the mall? pretty amazing
that's all for now...
UPDATE:
*Barack Obama is President!
*Great speech, I thought. Hopefully makes up for the fact that he kind of flubbed the oath of office.
*Bush 41's outfit is pretty outrageous (giant fur hat, bright purple scarf). I guess he's showing his true colors as a fashion maven in his old age?
January 19, 2009
Gem from SNL
If you have any conservative friends left, you can see how this would help in confronting their arguments about Bush keeping us safe. Inspired by fake Ann Coulter.
[Hurricane Katrina] was a great American tragedy. [Hurricane Katrina]'s devastation is unprecedented; nothing like it has ever taken so great a toll on American soil. [Hurricane Katrina] claimed thousands of lives on that fateful day. But it was largely government failures that allowed so many deaths to come from the terrible tragedy, of [Hurricane Katrina].
Thankfully, though, for [three] years, Bush has kept us safe.
[Hurricane Katrina] was a great American tragedy. [Hurricane Katrina]'s devastation is unprecedented; nothing like it has ever taken so great a toll on American soil. [Hurricane Katrina] claimed thousands of lives on that fateful day. But it was largely government failures that allowed so many deaths to come from the terrible tragedy, of [Hurricane Katrina].
Thankfully, though, for [three] years, Bush has kept us safe.
Presidential Playlists
So, I heard this referenced on NPR yesterday so I decided to look it up: Top 10 iPod Playlists for Obama and McCain.
Quick comment on McCain: even I'm smart enough to know you don't include the smart artist twice - especially ABBA - and you don't make the most recent song on your list a song from when your opponent was a teenager.
What prompted me to post this was that "Yes We Can" by will.i.am made Obama's playlist. I love that Obama has an ego, though some of my friends have disagreed with me that he does. If there was any doubt, I'll just say this: he admitted (while running for president) that one of his favorite "songs" is one that just consists of famous people singing stuff he said over clips of him saying it. If that's not egotistical ...
Quick comment on McCain: even I'm smart enough to know you don't include the smart artist twice - especially ABBA - and you don't make the most recent song on your list a song from when your opponent was a teenager.
What prompted me to post this was that "Yes We Can" by will.i.am made Obama's playlist. I love that Obama has an ego, though some of my friends have disagreed with me that he does. If there was any doubt, I'll just say this: he admitted (while running for president) that one of his favorite "songs" is one that just consists of famous people singing stuff he said over clips of him saying it. If that's not egotistical ...
Great Moments in Presidental Speeches
Believe it or not, there was something worth watching on Letterman.
January 18, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
